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

[metallicat]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

CTV.ca News Staff

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion will inform the Governor General Monday that he has enough parliamentary support to form a new government if the Tories fall.

I'd much prefer an Ignatieff run country than a Dion run country. At least Ignatieff can speak English.

[CaptainCrunch]

I think your a few pages to late there Jason14h

[Jason14h]

I think your a few pages to late there Jason14h

HAHA Damn, I missed pages 12ish through early 20's!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I've always thought that as an economic Stimulus that the Canadian Government should buy the Ford assembly plants in Ontario with a view towards building a Canadian made truck for local sales and export. the name would need to combine the elements of this unique Canadian product with the probable partnership of the Ford Motor Company who could provide the expertise and knowledge required to build and market this vehicle.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the 2009 CanaFord.

I know that you're joking, but I've always thought it was a huge downfall of ours that a country as large as Canada has no domestic automaker.

(I know that you must be joking because any good CPCer wouldn't endorse government involvement in business, would they?)

[moon]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

Secondly, the move is a sign of exactly what the Liberals lacked in the last election: strength. Dion was rightly criticized for lacking leadership and appearing, well, wussy. The Liberals don't look so wussy now, and with a new leader could be a lot more appealing come the next election.

Comprosing their own ideas/policies in order to try and backdoor they way into power is seen as strength?

To me it shows how far the Liberals have fallen that they can't hope to win power by elections and now have to resort to compromising their policies and make concessions to two other parties in order to get some of power.

Considering their history that would seem to show that they have no strength at all and wouldn't seem to be very appealling to voters in the future.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by ikaris

Well they didn't officially oppose this but we both know that was why this all happened.



I think at this state, the Conservatives have backpedaled enough to not justify this coalition anymore. The Liberals could walk away from this looking very good... Delay any action until January now that the Conservatives have talked about a potential stimulus package.

OK so we have a stimulus package like the coalition announced they did....

Where does the money go?

I asked this earlier i the thread when FA was bellerin that the reason this coup was a good idea was because Harper hadn't given explicit enough details on what the Cons would do.

Now I want to know...what is the 30 Billion for, who does it go to and why was it decided that way?

I venture to guess there is "no plan" and "nothing to discuss" at this point which makes the whole coalition thing nothing more than a power grab as well as being maybe the single most hypocrtic move in Canadian political history.

As someone else said, its entertaining if nothing else, unfortunatley i also find it frightening and offensive to Canadians.

[moon]

Originally Posted by driveway

And there are also people who didn't vote who perhaps would have voted for this coalition, so arguing about voter intent at this point is a moot question.

Exactly. Which is why you using the vote totals of the NDP and Liberals as some sort of proof that they have more support for their coalition than the Conservatives do was pointless.

It is quite possible that more Canadians would support that coalition (Canadians sure have shown that they are idiots on more than one occasion so no reason it should be different here), but the results of the last election do nothing to prove this.

Using the vote totals of the Liberals and NDP only show how many people support those parties individually.

[ikaris]

@transplant99

^^ Well, it looks like we're all soon going to find out based on Dion's intent to notify the GG.

[Ford Prefect]

Duceppe will have defacto veto power over the coalition according to National Post.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...of-quebec.aspx

How does that sit with everyone? As per the National Post headline this officially makes Canada a colony of Quebec. Not exactly news I guess, but it's probably the part of this whole deal that I have the most trouble with. A separatist party will in effect be controlling the nation's fate. Pretty surreal.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

Duceppe will have veto power over every coalition decision according to National Post.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...of-quebec.aspx

How does that sit with everyone? As per the National Post headline this officially makes Canada a colony of Quebec.

I hope he veto's the very first decision that crosses his desk, and topples this sham of a coalition government.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

I know that you're joking, but I've always thought it was a huge downfall of ours that a country as large as Canada has no domestic automaker.

(I know that you must be joking because any good CPCer wouldn't endorse government involvement in business, would they?)

Thought I would lighten the mood a bit.

Guess that didn't work.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories



I'd much prefer an Ignatieff run country than a Dion run country. At least Ignatieff can speak English.

GG: What can I do for you Mr. Dion?


SD: Well Madame GG, i wish to inform you that I have enough support to form a government.

GG: Did we not just have a an election for that, and the Conservatives were given a mandate in the form of a minority?

SD: Im sorry, what do you mean.

GG: THe CPC and Mr. Harper were elected 6 weeks ago. Yes or no?

SD: Im sorry, i do not understand the question.

GG: Do you need to hear it in french?

SD: Im sorry can we try it again...start over...i dont understand you.

GG: Nevermind...you have your wish.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by oilers_fan

I hope he veto's the very first decision that crosses his desk, and topples this sham of a coalition government.

Probably not, the first motion on the floor will probably be 2.4 billion to the province of Quebec to protect its dwindling polar bear population.

[photon]

Originally Posted by transplant99

SD: Im sorry can we try it again...start over...i dont understand you.

GG: Nevermind...you have your wish.

Lol, too soon!

[metallicat]

Apparently we have a coalition news conference starting soon. Adler Online will cover it.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Slava

I know that you're joking, but I've always thought it was a huge downfall of ours that a country as large as Canada has no domestic automaker.

(I know that you must be joking because any good CPCer wouldn't endorse government involvement in business, would they?)

I know your joking, but you know what? In a case like this i wouldn't mind it a whole bunch as long as it was done properly and the timing was right. IE; not now.

Like no UAW involvement period...since i can assuredly say they are at least 50% of the reason (likely even more) the auto industry is where it is today.

Also, for such a huge undertaking and with things as they are, it would be a pretty solid investment in the future of the country IMO. The spawn off of parts making jobs etc would be beneficial.

Good use of a "stimulus" package somewhere down the road.

[Slava]

^ I agree with you virtually 100% there. But my politics are sometimes too left for my own good!

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

Duceppe will have veto power over the coalition according to National Post.

Obviously, as the Liberals and the NDP together don't have enough votes to outvote the conservatives. Everyone has known this since the start of all the coalition talk.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Further to that last point, here is Paul Krugman's take on fiscal policy and the economy. He's talking about the U.S., but our economic fortunes are tied to theirs, like it or not:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/op...gman.html?_r=1

Krugman is a pretty well-respected economist. He won one of those Nobel Prize thingies. My inclination is to think he knows what he's talking about. Note in particular the historical argument:

"The idea that tight fiscal policy when the economy is depressed actually reduces private investment isn’t just a hypothetical argument: it’s exactly what happened in two important episodes in history.
The first took place in 1937, when Franklin Roosevelt mistakenly heeded the advice of his own era’s deficit worriers. He sharply reduced government spending, among other things cutting the Works Progress Administration in half, and also raised taxes. The result was a severe recession, and a steep fall in private investment.
The second episode took place 60 years later, in Japan. In 1996-97 the Japanese government tried to balance its budget, cutting spending and raising taxes. And again the recession that followed led to a steep fall in private investment."

A bit late to the fray... but the commonalities I see are:

RAISED TAXES

Now take Bob Rae's background. As Ontario Premier:

"The Rae government's first budget, introduced in 1991, increased social spending to mitigate the economic slowdown and projected a record deficit of $9.1 billion. Finance Minister Floyd Laughren argued that Ontario made a decision to target the effects of the recession rather than the deficit, and said that the budget would create or protect 70,000 jobs. It targeted more money to social assistance, social housing and child benefits, and raised taxes for high-income earners while lowering rates for 700,000 low-income Ontarians.[44]

A few years later, journalist Thomas Walkom described the budget as following a Keynesian orthodoxy, spending money in the public sector to stimulate employment and productivity. Unfortunately, it did not achieve its stated purpose. The recession was still severe. Walkom described the budget as "the worst of both worlds", angering the business community but not doing enough to provide for public relief." (Wikipedia)

(Bold emphasis mine, first Google link I came across)

Taxes, to me, are the key. We've seen failures when cutting spending and increasing spending. The commonality is raising taxes.

I look at the whole situation as this:
- If the Liberal party was really serious about this whole spending package, they'd elect Rae as party leader and join forces with the NDP. With all of the support for Ignatieff, who I see as much more right-wing fiscally, there is obviously a lot less support for a massive bailout than thought

- To those that say the Conservatives aren't compromising, consider this:

(a) Compromising isn't a one way street. Both sides have to give in a bit in order for a compromise to happen

(b) The Conservatives have been spending a lot of money - surely this is somewhat of a compromise in some areas.

[octothorp]

So let's say, hypothetically, that this coalition takes power, and in May, a new Liberal leader is appointed, who instantly becomes PM. There may be some question whether the liberals are then obligated to call an election to put this new leader's mandate to a federal vote.

But fortunately for the Liberals, Harper has already given them all the moral justification they need to stay in power as long as they can keep their coalition together. How? Via the piss-poor piece of legislation he passed last year regarding fixed election dates. If the Liberals follow the spirit of this law, they shouldn't call an election until October 15, 2012.

Not that I expect this government to last this long: either the coalition will splinter before then, or the Liberals will see an opportunity to grab for more power, and use the same loophole that Harper did.