Coalition Deal To Topple Minority Tory Govt- [Update Parliament Prorogued until Jan]

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

You're right, I haven't read it. It sounds like you have though ... can you direct me to where I can find a copy of it to read?

Yeah, here it is.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/v5/co...1201policy.pdf

It's worth noting that there's nothing in here about how the parties will behave as opposition; merely how they would act if they were made the government. There's nothing that binds them to topple the government at the next available opportunity.
I think Ignatieff's strategy will be to not formally kill the coalition agreement (which would insult NDP and Bloc voters, two groups he would hope to woo), but rather, simply not force a confidence vote.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Rerun

This was definitely a miscalculation on Harpers part.... but then again they don't call politics a BLOOD SPORT for nothing.

I wonder if he knew about the Layton/Duceppe agreement when he did this? If he did, it was a HUGE miscalculation because he basically forced the Liberals to take part in a coup plan that was ready to be implemented.

I truly believe that if there hadn't been an existing plan/agreement between the NDP and the Separtists, Harpers plan would have succeeded. The Liberals (Dion) wouldn't have had a clue on what to do about it and would have sat on their hands as usual.

Absolutely, I agree that the timing was lousy (for trying to nix vote subsidies). Then again, the PCs did campaign on "change" and "cleaning up the Government" when they won the first election two years ago.

The mistake they made was trying to pass this without a majority Government. It could be seen as them "trying to act like a majority" or maybe they just thought the Liberals and Socialists would agree that, in times like this, that money was needed elsewhere.

It certainly wasn't anything worth tearing down a newly elected Government over, though.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

At the same time, the way the minority leader tried to introduce extreme partisan legislation thinking that the opposition parties would be forced to pass it, was also something you would expect from a dictator.

They were all trying to exercise more poweer than they ought to.

Maybe...but at least that motion/bill would of been voted on...unlike the Liberal leadership campaign.

[Rathji]

The Liberal party must hold a normal leadership convention if it is to have any stability in it's coalition attempt at governing. If they don't hold a leadership convention and still manage to maintain a coalation government for a short while, there is no way they will avoid facing a Conservative majority next time Canadians go to the polls.

The scenario where Ignatieff wins the leadership, through an actual leadership convention, and decids to do his best to keep the coalition as long as possible. This is a situation where the Liberals could gain a minority government in the next election. I don't see it happening though.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Rathji

The Liberal party must hold a normal leadership convention if it is to have any stability in it's coalition attempt at governing. If they don't hold a leadership convention and still manage to maintain a coalation government for a short while, there is no way they will avoid facing a Conservative majority next time Canadians go to the polls.

The scenario where Ignatieff wins the leadership, through an actual leadership convention, and decids to do his best to keep the coalition as long as possible. This is a situation where the Liberals could gain a minority government in the next election. I don't see it happening though.

Ignatieff seemed pretty quiet during the coalition drama. I wonder how on board he actually was for it? Unless I missed his input on the matter...

If the Liberals do make a leadership change before January 26th, then I think the coalition idea is dead to them. I think part of the strategy was to use Dion one last time as a sacrificial lamb knowing that he would be stepping down in May. Ignatieff is one of the biggest assets the Liberals have and I can't see them wanting to damage his respect level. If they do, then they are even dumber than I thought... I also can't see Ignatieff willingly doing that to himself.

[old-fart]

So, now Dion is running away. No big surprise. He will go down in history as the worst leader the Liberals, and perhaps any federal political party has ever had.

It is interesting that a week ago the fools on the left were touting him as someone worthy of being PM, and now they can't dump him fast enough. Good enough to lead the country and set the economic direction in a time of global uncertainty, but when he couldn't get them back at the trough he's pressured to quit.

And now, the Liberals will likely break (or at least bend) their own constitution to undemocratically appoint their new leader. Since they have shown they don't really support democracy at all, this isn't all that surprising.

I look forward to the conservatives defining Mickey Ig before he can define himself. Should be pretty easy, considering he has lived more of his life outside Canada, was a huge supporter of the Iraq war, and was a big fan of Bush.

[flamesfever]

I see where the Bloc are not a signatory to the Coalition Agreement.

I understand that the Bloc are the only party so far who have provided input to the Conservatives with regard to the Budget.

It seems to me that if the Conservatives satisfy the Bloc with their demands, there may be a sufficient number of Bloc members who side with the Conservatives in the non confidence vote, regardless of what the Liberals and NDP do.

It seems the Bloc always like to be the King maker party and this would keep them in that position, although they would be with the Coalition also.

I wonder what exactly is their agreement with the Coalition.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Ignatieff seemed pretty quiet during the coalition drama. I wonder how on board he actually was for it? Unless I missed his input on the matter...

If the Liberals do make a leadership change before January 26th, then I think the coalition idea is dead to them. I think part of the strategy was to use Dion one last time as a sacrificial lamb knowing that he would be stepping down in May. Ignatieff is one of the biggest assets the Liberals have and I can't see them wanting to damage his respect level. If they do, then they are even dumber than I thought... I also can't see Ignatieff willingly doing that to himself.

From the National Post... re: Ignatieff...

Yet throughout the past 10 days, one of the must tumultuous periods in the history of Canadian politics, Mr. Ignatieff has been hard to nail down. He appeared briefly with Bob Rae and Dominic LeBlanc, his rivals for the leadership, to pledge support for the decision to form a coalition to oust the Conservatives, with Mr. Dion at its head. He was physically present in Ottawa, and offered a few nondescript comments when cornered in scrums, but had little to say while the rest of the country was engaging in a fierce debate about the crisis in Ottawa and what it meant for Canada's future.

His name was absent from a tentative list of coalition Cabinet members obtained by National Post columnist Don Martin. At a crucial meeting of the Liberal caucus, we're told, he remained silent. He was the last Liberal to affix his signature to a document attesting support for the coalition, waiting until Mr. Harper was about to meet with Michaelle Jean before finally signing on.

We're told he was uncomfortable with the notion of an alliance with the Bloc Quebecois. Nonetheless, even after Mr. Harper got his stay of execution from Ms. Jean, he indicated it wasn't time yet to disband the coalition, and continued to defend in on the weekend. He also said it would be "appropriate" to have a new leader before Mr. Harper's stay runs out.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...ignatieff.aspx

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Rerun

From the National Post... re: Ignatieff...



http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...ignatieff.aspx

From what I have read, he was trying to walk the fine line of supporting the party he has aspirations of taking over while behind closed doors want nothing to do with the coalition and not wanting his name associated with it, knowing that it would be a black mark in the future.

[Rerun]

Rae wants caucus vote stopped... which apparently is scheduled to happen this Wednesday

Bob Rae has sent out a mass e-mail to party members urging them to “put a stop” to a movement to allow caucus – and not the membership – to select a new leader.

Reports on how a new leader will be chosen does not sit well with Rae, as he also indicated on his own personal blog. “All weekend, I’d been hearing rumors about this, but today I was really surprised to read press reports about various MPs moving for an immediate vote to elect our Leader next Wednesday, in the Commons caucus. I thought I’d seen a lot of politics over 30 years of public service, but this one really came from left field.”

http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Cana...8/7672491.html

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

From what I have read, he was trying to walk the fine line of supporting the party he has aspirations of taking over while behind closed doors want nothing to do with the coalition and not wanting his name associated with it, knowing that it would be a black mark in the future.

... a typical politician...

He's learned how to play the game quite well in the past couple of years..

[FurnaceFace]

I suspect Rathje's scenario above should swap minority for majority. People are unhappy with the undemocratic coalition insanity however they are equally unhappy with the perceived bullying Harper has done and that puts him on shaky ground.

I happened to catch Rick Bell on City this morning and I felt he brought up a telling point. Harper was unable to win a majority running against a guy who couldn't string together two sentences in our primary language and had a ridiculous platform, how will he fair against someone who can speak and has a clue? Dumping Dion the dufus and replacing him with Ignatieff will win back a bunch of support The Libs had. Also Harper, while avoiding the direct blast of fecal matter, still isn't clean in this whole thing and lots of people won't forget it.

No matter what we think out here, there is a large portion of the country who don't want Stevie to run things. Yes, if there were an election today, he'd win in a landslide, however things will calm down. Dion the dufus will go back to Puffin farming or whatever he does, the budget will get through, Ignatieff will get anointed party leader, have time to rebuild the party, and at some future date an election will be called and then we'll see what happens. I think Stevie would have a big fight on his hands in that next election but we'll see what happens between now and then.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Rae wants caucus vote stopped... which apparently is scheduled to happen this Wednesday
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Cana...8/7672491.html

I never thought I would agree so whole heartedly with Bob Rae...

The whole concept of a PM being put into office without being elected as such kinda rubs me the wrong way. I understand it needs to happen though, given the way our electoral system works. However, for a party to lose the election, somehow manage to form the government and then have the leader of that party be elected not from party membership or even delegates, but from MPs of his own party.

That part just makes my stomach churn.

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

I suspect Rathje's scenario above should swap minority for majority. People are unhappy with the undemocratic coalition insanity however they are equally unhappy with the perceived bullying Harper has done and that puts him on shaky ground.

Under the right circumstances, I could see a Liberal minority with NDP being the balance of power, which would give them a virtual majority. However, I doubt we will see a real majority until one party in Canada proves they are reasonably competent. If the Liberals pull this off, which I seriously doubt they will, they will be on thr right track to making a stab at compentency. If they don't though, it is all in Harpers hands.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Rerun

... a typical politician...

He's learned how to play the game quite well in the past couple of years..

I think every one of them in any sort of a leadership role does this thing. Look at how evasive they all are. "Plausible deniability" seems to be the politicians code.

Even the ones who sound like they are being honest and forthright are usually just extra clever and already have an excuse at the ready for when their promise doesn't work or the results aren't what was appeared to be promised.

I'm guessing Mike Holmes' mantra for picking renovators also applies to politicians:

20% are good, 70% are bad, 10% are ugly.

I'd be willing to be this supersedes any party lines.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

I suspect Rathje's scenario above should swap minority for majority. People are unhappy with the undemocratic coalition insanity however they are equally unhappy with the perceived bullying Harper has done and that puts him on shaky ground.

I happened to catch Rick Bell on City this morning and I felt he brought up a telling point. Harper was unable to win a majority running against a guy who couldn't string together two sentences in our primary language and had a ridiculous platform, how will he fair against someone who can speak and has a clue? Dumping Dion the dufus and replacing him with Ignatieff will win back a bunch of support The Libs had. Also Harper, while avoiding the direct blast of fecal matter, still isn't clean in this whole thing and lots of people won't forget it.

No matter what we think out here, there is a large portion of the country who don't want Stevie to run things. Yes, if there were an election today, he'd win in a landslide, however things will calm down. Dion the dufus will go back to Puffin farming or whatever he does, the budget will get through, Ignatieff will get anointed party leader, have time to rebuild the party, and at some future date an election will be called and then we'll see what happens. I think Stevie would have a big fight on his hands in that next election but we'll see what happens between now and then.

I agree with a lot of the points you have made. However, I don't think a new leader and time will erase all when it comes to the Liberal party. The Liberal party "brand" has been significantly damaged as a result of this attempted coalition "coup". Although it certainly was a legal attempt to usurp the ruling Conservative party, it had a real bad "smell" to it.

A lot of people will remember that when it comes to the next election... and they will remember that Ignatieff didn't speak out against it.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Rathji

I never thought I would agree so whole heartedly with Bob Rae...

The whole concept of a PM being put into office without being elected as such kinda rubs me the wrong way. I understand it needs to happen though, given the way our electoral system works. However, for a party to lose the election, somehow manage to form the government and then have the leader of that party be elected not from party membership or even delegates, but from MPs of his own party.

That part just makes my stomach churn.



Under the right circumstances, I could see a Liberal minority with NDP being the balance of power, which would give them a virtual majority. However, I doubt we will see a real majority until one party in Canada proves they are reasonably competent. If the Liberals pull this off, which I seriously doubt they will, they will be on thr right track to making a stab at compentency. If they don't though, it is all in Harpers hands.

Like Rae says.... they can put together a Canadian general election in 5 weeks.... why can't they put together a Liberal leadership election in the same time.
Ignatieff, who supports a caucus coronation, is playing dirty politics and is really trying to screw Rae out of his chance to win the leadership.

Go Rae Go!

[browna]

I'm guessing maybe they'll tag whoever they choose with an interim tag, until the convention. That way, Ignatieff (who'll probably win the MP vote anyway) can get to work and work with Harper on this budget.
The Liberals don't want to have Dion (my, what has changed in a week, big surprise (not really)), or be a headless party, especially with a guy like Layton running around thinking he's suddenly important and some sort of Canadian visionary that history will write about, having any more say in things and in the budget than the Liberals when Parliment comes back.

So, compromise for a few months and get someone in there asap. Then, work with Harper on a compromisefor the budget and kick the coaltion to the curb. Sounds like Ignatieff has has common sense and was as embarassed as a Liberal party member could be with the actions of the party (not going to blame last week soley on Dion, the party itself has more then enough blame to share, no matter how bad Dion lookis coming out of it all) last week, and smart not to get caught up in the garbage that was being tossed out by his party last week.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Like Rae says.... they can put together a Canadian general election in 5 weeks.... why can't they put together a Liberal leadership election in the same time.
Ignatieff, who supports a caucus coronation, is playing dirty politics and is really trying to screw Rae out of his chance to win the leadership.

Go Rae Go!

As much as you'd like to see Rae win to alienate the fiscally conservative Liberals, it probably won't happen.

Browna has summarized pretty well the best strategy to go with for the Liberals.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by browna

I'm guessing maybe they'll tag whoever they choose with an interim tag, until the convention. That way, Ignatieff (who'll probably win the MP vote anyway) can get to work and work with Harper on this budget.
The Liberals don't want to have Dion (my, what has changed in a week, big surprise (not really)), or be a headless party, especially with a guy like Layton running around thinking he's suddenly important and some sort of Canadian visionary that history will write about, having any more say in things and in the budget than the Liberals when Parliment comes back.

So, compromise for a few months and get someone in there asap. Then, work with Harper on a compromisefor the budget and kick the coaltion to the curb. Sounds like Ignatieff has has common sense and was as embarassed as a Liberal party member could be with the actions of the party (not going to blame last week soley on Dion, the party itself has more then enough blame to share, no matter how bad Dion lookis coming out of it all) last week, and smart not to get caught up in the garbage that was being tossed out by his party last week.

The way I read it, is that the Libs will be choosing a permanent leader sometime before Jan.27/09.

Whether its by member election or by caucus coronation, who knows.... Although I would bet $100 that Ignatieff gets his way and its by having the Liberal parliamentary caucus choose the "permanent" leader.
I then suspect they will then change the May 2009 leadership convention to a leadership "review".

Thats why, I suspect, that Bob Rae is fighting so hard against the caucus and only the caucus choosing the new leader. Its his only chance, cause he know's he will loose the caucus vote.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by ikaris

As much as you'd like to see Rae win to alienate the fiscally conservative Liberals, it probably won't happen.

Browna has summarized pretty well the best strategy to go with for the Liberals.

.... aw come on! Don't crush all my hopes.