What Jack Layton has done is to give the Conservatives their way out. The NDP tables the bill. The Conservatives offer an amendment or two (no doubt already agreed to, in advance, between the Conservatives and the NDP). The Liberals offer their own amendments. Votes are taken. With NDP support, Conservative amendments pass. Liberal amendments are rejected. No election.
Go for it Jack. But bend over, its spanky time!
(PS. the rest of the Janke post is bullshit.)
27 comments:
It was funny the other day, they had a strategist talking head thingy, and they spoke of these "rumors" of the NDP and Cons working toward an agreement. The NDP strategist was simply AGHAST at the mere mention, scoffing and dismissive. Watch for the frame of making Parliament work, even if it's with the guy you can't trust, the guy you vote against whenever the Liberals have you covered. I'm sure it will be a principled meeting of the minds now....
Talk to me when the NDP actually props up the Conservatives in a confidence vote like the Liberals have...how many times now.
Getting technical now, are we McLelland? I'm sure Jack's Tory masters will spare them the indignity. Optics and all. But we all know. YOU know.
Oh, and I made the mistake of reading Janke's post. I wonder if he actually believes what he writes, because it's laughable. I especially loved the "time heals all wounds" comment about the Cons in Quebec. Time doesn't help dead people.
As far as Liberals "grinding their teeth" if we don't have an election, well... People like to play up the "hawks", but from everything I've gathered the vast majority don't want to go now, the fall is the realistic window. This EI push is more correctly an acknowledgement that NOBODY else wants to go, so we can throw some elbows now and become a real opposition. I've never seen it as a real election threat, although you have to be prepared to follow through. As Janke himself said, the NDP don't want an election, you know darn well the Bloc doesn't, so the Liberals are just asserting themselves within that reality. I seem to remember the NDP pushing everything under the sun when they knew an election wasn't in the cards, why is it different now?
Ah Robert, it hurts to be on the other side does it not?
That is the problem with absolutists like yourself when it comes to politics. Eventually the actions you condemn will be done by your guys. It is just the nature of politics.
The true test for folks like you is how you react when it happens. Do they stick to their principles and condemn their party for taking action they have condemned in others or do they take the hypocritical path and make excuses?
Judging by your comment I guess we know which one you have chosen.
I like that you're relying on Steve Janke's analysis rather than what Layton actually said.
If you watch the actual interview, it's clear that all Layton is saying is that he's focused on getting improvements to EI rather than being focused on forcing an election.
What do you expect the NDP to do? Demand changes to EI and then vote against those changes if the Conservatives happen to embrace them?
That's silly.
I'm quite certain that the NDP will vote to pass their own agenda. What I'm sure they won't do is vote to pass the Conservatives' agenda. Michael Igantieff did that.
RayK,
He's announced his surrender. Deal with it.
Jack said he would not use the opposition day to table a Dipper non-confidence motion,
BUT they would still vote 'against' the government if Libs tabled a non-confidence motion.
So June 23, if Libs go non-confidence motion,
it's up to the Bloc to prop up the govt.
My guess is Gilles Duceppe is breathing a big sigh of relief. The Conservatives are so unpopular in Quebec right now that for them to be seen propping them up would negatively effect their own popularity.
Thanks to Mr. Layton he no longer has to worry about that.
Steve: I agree, I never believed that there would be an election this Spring. Late Fall is the most probably time for it, if not next Spring.
I also agree that, in general, the Liberals are not really pushing for an election this spring and they never were. They have the wind in their sails but they need more time to consolidate their support and to increase their fund raising.
The threat of an election was just to push some of the other players to put their cards on the table for preventing it. Mr. Layton has obliged. I wonder how the Dippers feel about being played so well by the Liberals.
"Ah Robert, it hurts to be on the other side does it not?"
"That is the problem with absolutists like yourself when it comes to politics. Eventually the actions you condemn will be done by your guys."
Have you gone mad?
There is no comparison between voting to keep a government in power for two years straight because it suit your partisan political interests, and forcing a government you deeply disapprove of to adopt your policies through public and political pressure.
A ten year old could see the difference between those two things.
"RayK, He's announced his surrender. Deal with it."
What are you talking about?
Layton said he would vote down the government if the Liberals moved to do the same.
Vote. Down. The government. How much clearer could one be?
But if the Liberals are going to keep propping up the Conservatives, why not try to address other issue in the meantime?
ottlib, SteveV,
My fear is the gov. staggers along like this until 2010 or 2011 or 2012. Not that I think they can ever really win again.. But they can prolong the stagnation...if Jack chooses to preserve his own skin!
h Robert, it hurts to be on the other side does it not?
Weak liberal spin never hurts.
RayK
I second BCL's statement. However, if your way of dealing with it is denial then I have no problem with that. Whatever gets you through the night.
BCL: There will come a time when the cost of supporting the Conservatives will be steeper than the benefits and both the Bloc and the NDP will have to bring down the government just to cut their losses in any subsequent election.
We are not there yet but we should arrive there sometime in late 2009 or early 2010.
"Weak liberal spin never hurts."
Then why did you feel compelled to comment on it?
Weak liberal spin never hurts.
You're crying inside. Admit it.
I fear that too BCL,although it would be fun to watch Layton and Harper manoeuver to get past the next budget.
I have one regret. In my initial comment, I actually put a comment about Robert coming a long with the typical response, but deleted it because I didn't want to be provocative. Thanks for being so predictable it hurts Robert!
Cue Jan from Nowhere...
You're crying inside. Admit it.
Like the guy at the end of The Crying Game.
I actually put a comment about Robert coming a long...
Yeah, it was quite the long shot that I'd post a comment on a blog I routinely comment on. You must be a member of the Steve Janke Junior Detective Squad.
Ya, but it's better when you already know what you'll say. Do you have a string on your back?
Then why did you feel compelled to comment on it?
For the same reason I feel compelled to comment on any blog post; boredom.
By the way, I am on record as saying I'd support Layton if he worked a deal with the Conservatives.
What I wonder about though, is why none of you libfloggers aren't getting on Iggy's case to secure a deal with Layton first. You have apparently all forgotten that the NDP are pragmatists that will settle for less seats in the HOC--if necessary--if it means they get to implement some of their agenda.
why none of you libfloggers aren't getting on Iggy's case to secure a deal with Layton first.
I sent him a strongly-worded letter.
Steve V, bigcitylib, ottlib:
Isn't it a little odd--and a stunning manifestation of blind partisanship--that you're attack Jack Layton for a vote that hasn't happened in which he would hypothetically support a single NDP initiative with--presumably--all other parties because that would mean he had agreed with the Conservatives on something while the leader of the Liberal Party Michael Ignatieff has spent two years voting for the Conservatives' entire agenda?
I urge you to take that argument to the Canadian people.
Ray
The point here, the NDP are, and have always been, every bit as strategic and partisan in their behavior, as the people they chastise from Mount Pure. It's nothing to do with partisanship, simply noting that self interest is a driving force. As I said before, the only difference between the NDP and the Liberals, one is weighing a question of governance, the other is free to pontificate from the land of the theoretical. When circumstance dictates, then the NDP can make a difference, and that's the political goal. This is why the NDP want no part of an election now that risks a decline. If EI is such a core principle, then vote non confidence, to hell with politics. Only a very naive person doesn't think the NDP and Cons have quietly explored escape routes that would be mutually acceptable. It's all a given from here.
I bite:
"If EI is such a core principle, then vote non confidence, to hell with politics. Only a very naive person doesn't think the NDP (substitute Liberals for NDP because based on voting record in the past two years, if I was betting person, the libs are the odds on overwhelming favourite)and Cons have quietly explored escape routes that would be mutually acceptable. It's all a given from here." And I agree with that based on the liberals record 71 votes and counting in keeping the Harper agenda on track!
And like Robert I'm bored.
It's all a given from here." And I agree with that based on the liberals record 71 votes and counting in keeping the Harper agenda on track!
And like Robert I'm boredAnd you're boring, you half-wit. How many more times can you speuw out "propping up the Conservative agenda?"
Troll.
Post a Comment