BQ pushing for repeal of the Clarity Act

328 posts / 0 new
Last post
autoworker autoworker's picture

Boom Boom wrote:

Jesus. The NDP is being vindictive and petty. Just like the Conservatives.

That should amuse the many who voted Conservative in that riding.

Debater

Bloc Leader Daniel Paillé says Patry was attracted by Layton, who wanted to do politics differently.

"Now that we're in the leadership of Tom Mulcair, who falls into the old habits of the Conservatives, and who says we're going to do robocalls, and who says we're going to apply partisan pressure, I think on the part of Mr. Mulcair, it's shameful," Paillé told reporters following question period.

--

NDP target Claude Patry with robocalls after defection


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/03/05/pol-ndp-robocall-defect...

 

Unionist

Actually, if Claude Patry was elected as part of "Jack Layton's team" - and Jack Layton is now gone (without consulting or asking anyone's permission) - I think the entire team should resign and run in byelections.

Otherwise, they're just mocking the people who voted for Jack's team.

Yeah.

Ontario logic will not work in Québec. The NDP should concentrate on building alliances to defeat Harper. If it doesn't, then no one will vote for it, anywhere. Except those who care about the brand and nothing else.

 

 

Unionist

Here's an [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/03/05/pol-ndp-robocall-defect... CBC report[/url].

Quote:

Bloc Leader Daniel Paillé says Patry was attracted by Layton, who wanted to do politics differently.

"Now that we're in the leadership of Tom Mulcair, who falls into the old habits of the Conservatives, and who says we're going to do robocalls, and who says we're going to apply partisan pressure, I think on the part of Mr. Mulcair, it's shameful," Paillé told reporters following question period.

The NDP has long maintained that MPs who cross the floor should resign their seats and run for election under their new party's banner.

Patry has reportedly said he won't step down to force a byelection.

Asked by reporters about the robocall, Mulcair said he had no problem with it.

"I'm extremely okay with that approach by the party. I find that it's outrageous that someone who presented himself with one political party, without having the courage to consult the people in his riding, could quickly change parties," Mulcair said.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

So much for Dippers voting in Tom because they thought he could hold onto the Quebec seats.  The best laid plans of mice ...

KenS

Puffery from the Bloc. WHAT a surprise.

Nor do I see any evidence whatsoever that Tom Mulcair is not doing the best job that could be done on this.

I wouldn't do the robocalls. But I dont think they are a big deal either. [I see it more or less their job to deal with all of that, and I'm not going to quibble.]

Jack Layton would be no less challenged by the situation. And of course the ones jumping ship are going to use  'I came here with Jack' as a handy cover.

As far as I'm concerned, they have a right to change their minds. But don't try to dress it up as something else. Just lipstick on the pig. [And no competition with the 'artfulness' of how that is done in BC.]

Unionist

Excuse me Ken. The NDP campaigned on the Sherbrooke Declaration. The entire caucus should resign en masse and run in byelections. Which electors did they consult before changing their policy on the drafting of the referendum question? Hypocrites.

Or is it ok to switch principles and promises, as long as you don't trade in your tattered little party jersey for another one?

KenS

Yes sir. I'm a hypocrite too.

Yup, wholesale switch of principles.

Unionist

No, Ken, this isn't about you.

And no, Ken, whether it's wholesale or retail, I condemned the insultingly-named "Unity" Bill as a betrayal of Sherbrooke and of the NDP's historic recognition of Québec's right to determine its future without external interference from the start - irrespective of Claude Patry's defection - and before the NDP's cynical and self-righteous campaign of having a machine call people's homes claiming that they are pure while someone else is "mocking" them.

I started voting NDP in 2007 - Mulcair, to be precise, in a byelection -
one year after they adopted Sherbrooke. It ain't perfect, but it certainly is a minimum necessary condition. Unless and until they return to that democratic stand, I (and a few others) will return to "strategic" voting or just stay home. Because when it comes to the equality and sovereignty of nations, there's no such thing as just a little bit of interference.

KenS

Here's the way I see it- and Unionist is familiar with it, since I've been saying the same thing about where the SD comes from since years before most people had heard of it, even in passing.

Being the imperfect people that Jack Layton and Pierre Ducasse are, leading a small crew of activists in Quebec, the Sherbrooke Declaration was conceived largely in a Quebec bubble. I suspect that even the pragmatist Jack gave little sustained thought to how this was going to fly in the Rest of Canada: within the NDP, let alone among supprters outsied the party.

No one would be under any illusions that passing it at Convention was a serious test. Motherhood issues get passed. Talk about self-determination, among the self selecting people who are Convention delegates that is guaranteed to pass easily.

One of the weaknesses of LAZY pragmatism is that unless pushed to do otherwise, the brains in question treat this as two different and seperate silos. Sherbrooke Declaration is good for Quebec. We'll deal with what the rest of the NDP and public think of it when we have to. Part of that is a lazy confidence that doesnt look at the obstacles.

So with that "preparation", here we were in 2011, the clock starts ticking on how this is all going to be reckoned.

The head popping out of the sand at the last minute to deal with it is not the method I would choose. But I know that some "better way" would also be very difficult. Someone(s) ox(es) were going to get gored. The Unity Bill does shuffle away from the clear principles of the SD. But as we have witnessed here, the substantive principles set out Sherbrooke Declaration is not popular even in the NDP, outside of Quebec. Trust me, most people see the Unity Bill as just re-phrasing and sticking with the SD.... and most of the NDP is just acquiescing to it. [One of those things the federal party does, whether we want it or not.]

Its not pretty, but I dont just see this as 'best for the NDP'... I think this is the best we can do to move the substantive goals forward of recognizing self determination. I've got plenty of hills I will die on too. But I'm pretty sure that even if I lived in Quebec, the waffling of the Unity Bill would not be one of them. Parties/organizations compromising on main principles is a problem. But unless you are an unequivocal sovereignist [like Claude Patry] and support the Bloc's goals through thick and thin, then you comapre the NDP sticking by principles when there is a cost, to the BQ sticking by principles despite the cost. Which would be the kind of thing that gets Unionsit and others talking about maybe not voting.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Mulcair at a press scrum right now: "Claude Patry said our party is too federalist, while Mr. Harper says we are too close to the separatists, while we are really just trying to do our best for the Canadian people."

 He said his party will vote 100% against the BQ bill to repeal the Clarity Act simple because repealing the Clarity Act at this time will leave nothing else. He said the party will NOT be whipped to vote but nevertheless expects the party to vote 100% against the BQ motion.

Anyone got popcorn? Laughing

 

 

ETA: Tom is also asking why  Prime Minister Harper hasn't removed Arthur Porter from the Privy Council - suggesting there's secrets here that have to be brought forward. Hinting there are secret deals being made behind closed doors.

ygtbk

The CBC covered the press conference that Boom Boom refers to. Here's a link:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/03/06/pol-bq-clarity-act-vote...

Unionist
KenS

Interesting. Tom seems to have gone out farther on a limb than he needed to: saying that despite not whipping, he expected everyone would vote the BQ bill down. He didn't promise that, but he would not have mentioned it unless he was very sure.

I bet it has been an exciting Caucus discussion.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Voting against the leader, even in a non whipped vote is no way to get ahead.

KenS

Yes, but in a large Caucus, if the issue is especially contentious, someone will do it anyway. And that is helped along by a lot of MPs knowing they have little or nothing to lose.

Debater

How will voting against the BQ's bill to repeal the Clarity Act play with the NDP's base in Quebec?  Will some of them go back to the BQ?  Daniel Paillé may use this to his advantage.

KenS

troll, troll...

It has been discussed on this page, back through the whole 300+ posts... and in multiple predecessor threads.

NorthReport

5 Bloc members voted in favour to repeal the Clarity Act's second reading, and that's it.

What do the poor Liberals do now?

Debater

From: kady o'malley

 

And a big round of applause from his colleagues for Liberal MP Stephane Dion.

 

https://twitter.com/kady/status/309448114727682048

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

All NDP MPs voting NOT to repeal Dion's Clarity Act. Yeah, that will go down well here in Quebec. Stupid fuckers.

Mulcair said (on P&P last night) he had the votes from the caucus sewn up 24 hours before the actual vote, so what's the real deal here?

Debater

Bloc motion on Clarity Act easily defeated while inflicting damage on NDP


The Canadian Press

 

OTTAWA - The Bloc Quebecois has lost its bid to re-write the rules for Quebec secession — but not before inflicting considerable political damage on the NDP.

A Bloc motion calling for repeal of the Clarity Act was easily defeated late Wednesday by a vote of 283-5, with Conservatives, New Democrats and Liberals all opposing it.

There is no surprise in the motion's crushing defeat, but the Bloc succeeded in exposing divisions within the NDP — the BQ's arch-rivals in Quebec — and prompted New Democrat MP Claude Patry to defect to the Bloc last week.

The motion also provided fodder to federalist rivals to accuse the NDP of pandering to separatists with its proposed alternative to the Clarity Act

 

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/bloc-motion-on-clarity-act-easil...

KenS

I could have written that article two weeks ago.

Just fill in the blanks with the appropriate numbers and events.

Unionist

KenS wrote:

I could have written that article two weeks ago.

Just fill in the blanks with the appropriate numbers and events.

You were hoping the NDP would abstain.

KenS

Hoping is [was] the operative word. Good memory though.

I knew that wasnt going to happen some time ago. Among other things, it doesnt make sense: the Unity Bill is for maximizing distance between the NDP and voting to repeal the Clarity Act.

KenS

"Instead, the NDP needs to play its own wedge, and shift the debate in Quebec away from the federalist-separatist axis and towards the left-right axis. It needs to take a page from Brigitte de Pape, and position itself as the Only Thing That Can Stop Stephen Harper.

Stockholm

Boom Boom wrote:

All NDP MPs voting NOT to repeal Dion's Clarity Act. Yeah, that will go down well here in Quebec. Stupid fuckers.

Mulcair said (on P&P last night) he had the votes from the caucus sewn up 24 hours before the actual vote, so what's the real deal here?

I don't think anyone in Quebec actually cares - apart from a handful of fanatics who will either vote BQ until the day they die or not vote at all in federal elections. There is no referendum on the horizon and right now even if a fuzzy confusing, loaded question like the ones used in 1980 and 1995 were asked - the Yes side would go down in flames.

Since the pur et dur crowd is so big on the National Assembly having 100% say on what question would be asked in a hypothetical referendum - i wonder what the reaction would be if the federalist majority (PLQ + CAQ) in the National Assembly passed a motion that the wording of any future referendum must be "Do you support Quebec becoming a totally independent country with no special ties to the rest of Canada?" The dirty little secret in Quebec is that if you actually ask a clear question - No would beat Yes by about a 3 to 1 margin.

Pages