UPDATED: Jack Layton: Making Parliament Work … Like A Fox?

by kadyomalley on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 12:49pm - 112 Comments

Although you can’t quite tell from the story exactly who tipped the Globe off to Guy Giorno’s lack of proper email etiquette apparent lack of interest in working with the Fourth Party on, well, anything, the fact that an NDP spokesman is quoted — by name, and on the record, even — yet PMO “has yet to respond to questions” suggests that it was probably the former.

Which raises an even more interesting possible scenario: Could it be that Team Jack is now somewhat frantically rethinking that initial pledge to seriously consider supporting the government’s proposal to extend employment insurance benefits for long-term workers — and, as a result, the government itself during the upcoming confidence vote?

It strikes ITQ that sending a follow-up email  to inquire whether, perhaps, McGrath’s initial correspondence had inadvertently been caught by the PMO spam filter would be a distinctly less confrontational way to find out if it was a deliberate snub than leaking it to the press. But by doing it this way, he can still throw up his hands in despair at the intransigence of the prime ministe, vote against the ways and means motion, thus preserving his party’s perfect record of voting non-confidence in the Conservatives — and blame the other parties for not wanting to Make Parliament Work.

Of course, that would also bring on an election. But at this point, even getting pummeled at the polls that may prove to be the least demoralizing outcome for the NDP if the prime minister’s utter indifference over yesterday’s show of tentative, yet earnest support is any indication of how Stephen Harper will respond when Jack shows up on the doorstep of 24 Sussex with his ideas on pension and credit card reform, infrastructure funding, climate change and whatever else is on his wish list.

UPDATE: The NDP spokesperson quoted in the Globe article, Karl Belanger, dropped a note to ITQ to let us know that he was not the source of the story.

Bookmark and Share
  • MJ Patchouli

    Doesn't making that public show the prime minister actually does want an election, but wants to point the fingers at the other parties? Doesn't it show his utter disinterest in 'making parliament work?'

    You know, what Don Martin said today in his column.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

      I think that Don Martin is way off. Some reporters are so stuck in the Harper-the-Chess-Master narrative that they simply can't accept that the PM might actually really be dreading going to the polls. Harper doesn't want an election because he knows that he can't deliver a majority at this time. If he doesn't bring in a majority, the fractures within his caucus will expand and he will be jeopardy.

      • Dakota

        False…Harper will stay on as long as he keeps winning, minority or not. The fact is that with the Bloq taking 50 seats out of play the chance of either Liberals or Conservatives gaining a majority is slim to none. The Conservative caucus knows this as well as anyone.

        • John

          Slim odds beat a fat chance any day.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

    It will be interesting too see how much the CPC messaging of unneccesary elections works if it's blatantly obvious to anyone with a pulse that they fell on their own sword.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

    Isn't it in both side's interest to make it seem like they hate each other, but are moving forward in the interest of Candians, or something like that? I don't see the email thing as anything more than a signal that no back room dealings led to the NDP support.

    But I'm certainly open to persuasion, as always.

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

      What NDP support?

      But I'm certainly open to persuasion, as always.

      You're not even open to reality.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

        I've got no one but myself to blame for encouraging you, but kindly fill me in on what dimension of reality I've so badly brutalized, o' wise one.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

          I already did.

          …led to the NDP support.

          What NDP support? Has there been a confidence vote I haven't heard about.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

          I've got no one but myself to blame for encouraging you…

          I know, it really offends grits and tories that dippers not only exist but have the nerve to express their opinions in public.

          • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

            I'm neither a grit nor a tory, but I'll freely admit that self-pitying asswipes like yourself offend me. Or bore me, like most zealots do.

        • RayK

          The NDP have not said "that they will support Tory's".

          I think that's the break from reality to which McClelland is referring.

          • http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com bigcitylib

            Their body language speaks volumes. It says "We surrender."

            And why is McClelland expressing his opinion in public again? Is that allowed?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

            "Layton Signals NDP Could Support Tory EI Plan"

            http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/09/14/employm…

            I must have been out my frigging tree to suggest the NDP might support the Conservatives.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

            …led to the NDP support.

            You didn't suggest anything. You said it was already done.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

            I think we can put that down to brevity. I mean, sure, perhaps he should have said "the previously reported alleged consideration of support of.." but .. geeze.

            You may want to tone down the hypersensitivity if you can. (Though I'll admit, I've got my hot buttons too, perhaps he inadvertently pegged one of yours)

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

            It has nothing to do with buttons being pushed. I responded to his error. He asked for clarification so I responded to it again. He took offense to my wisecrack and then claimed he was right so I responded yet again. A simple, "my bad" would have been easier but he can't bring himself to say it. And I'm the one he claims is the zealot.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

            As an outside observer, I'll just point out that you're the one who I suggested might be hypersensitive. So whatever the intensity of your feelings, your writing is conveying something you perhaps don't intend.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/YYZ YYZ

            Semantics, ass-face.

          • John

            Not nice YYZ. And that nasty term you used is misspelled — iqualuit is the word you seek.

  • Alan

    Well, if we want to engage in some rampant speculation, of the "Harper playing chess" variety, this story might have been leaked by the Cons. This way, they can point to it as an clear indication that they aren't making backroom deals, and that they aren't making deals with 'socialists', in an attempt to ensure the coalition theme still has legs for an election.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

      Again with the Chess analogy.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

      It's the only thing that makes any sense, since Karl Belanger said it wasn't him. (Unless he's lying to us, and no politician would do that directly to our faces).

      And perhaps shoring up the Conservative supporters who would abandon Harper en masse if they thought he'd done a backroom deal with the socialists is more important than showing the rest of Canadians he can work with others.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

    No, I know — and really, when they're not on camera or on the record, most Tories aren't even pretending that they don't want an election. It's all for show. But the official line from the PM is still that he is open to working with other parties, a premise somewhat belied by this sort of revelation.

  • MJ Patchouli

    I could believe this, and Kady does say it isn't clear who brought the story to the media. Well, to Jane Taber that is.

  • Mulletaur

    I'm back to thinking that we're on for Friday. I can't for the life of me see the NDP supporting a Ways and Means motion which includes measure to enable free trade with Columbia after having accused the Uribe government of murder, torture and human rights abuses including complicity in the murder of 1,500 peasants so their land could be stolen.

    • the realist

      You have obviously fallen for the fiction that the NDP have principles. As yesterday's performance by Jack demonstrates clearly, stated principles disappear pretty quickly when your cushy job may vanish.

    • Bonnie N

      Jeepers Mulletaur

      I totally missed the Colombia FT agreement.changes – it is a poison pill for the Bloc and the NDP.

      • Mulletaur

        Hmm, not sure yet, but when I can find something to back up what my dear friend hollinm says, I'll post it.

      • Mulletaur

        Ah, there we go, Ditchburn has the story for CP :

        "The NDP sent a signal that it will vote to support the Conservative government on a confidence measure for the first time since Prime Minister Stephen Harper formed a government almost four years ago.

        However, the party was surprised late Monday to find that the motion also contains a possible poison pill: a reference to tax measures that will go into effect should Parliament approve separate legislation on a free trade agreement with Colombia.

        The NDP is adamantly opposed to the trade pact due to Colombia's record of human rights abuses.

        Supporting the ways and means motion would not prevent New Democrats from voting later against the trade pact. But the party must decide whether it wants to be seen to be facilitating the trade deal in any way.

        NDP spokesman Brad Lavigne said the party is assessing whether inclusion of the Colombian trade deal tax changes in the motion are "substantial or inconsequential." Other New Democrats characterized the matter as largely "administrative" and not overly significant."

        Wow, I wonder if their hard core militants will agree. Interesting times.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

          The amendment in the ways and means motion is meaningless book-keeping.

          • Mulletaur

            If you call changing the CBSA tariff structure to put into effect free trade with Columbia "meaningless book-keeping", sure.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

          Mulletaur, why didn't you post the following paragraph?

          "A spokesman for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty was quick to insist that "the ways and means (motion) is in no way related" to the Colombian trade deal. He suggested the NDP had made "an honest mistake."

          • Mulletaur

            Because I don't think that's true.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            C-23 is being debated on the House floor as we speak.

          • Dakota

            Ha! Nice editing job!

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

      Are you sure about that? I'm under the impression that the Columbia deal is being introduced through its own legislation. I don't think that it is included in the Ways/Means.

      • Mulletaur

        The Ways and Means motion, as far as I understand, provides amendments to the Customs Tariff which enables, at least in part, the provisions of C-23, An Act to implement the Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the Republic of Colombia, on a contingent basis.

      • Mulletaur

        For clarity :

        "COORDINATING AMENDMENTS DISPOSITIONS DE COORDINATION
        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)."

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

          But this is all worthless w/o the passing of C-23, yes?

          • Mulletaur

            As far as I can tell, yes. But it still enables the free trade legislation in practical terms through the Customs Tariff.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            Practical terms? What does that mean?

          • Mulletaur

            It gives force and effect to the statutory changes made through C-23 by amending the Customs treatment of goods coming from Columbia in the Customs Tariff, the book CBSA refers to when it determines whether imported goods are subject to duties. They can pass all the legislation they want, if the tariff changes are not put into the Customs Tariff and published in the Gazette, no free trade.

    • Gawd

      bloc is supporting ways and means

  • Ted

    While were making wild speculations about foxes, maybe Harper is blowing off Layton because he knows he's already got the Bloc in his pocket, or has even worked out yet another Parliamentary deal with the Bloc.

    It is a little strange to me how much attention is being paid to Jack! caving into the Conservatives, and so little attention (at least in the English press) about what Gilles may be doing or is up to.

    • Mulletaur

      Events have proven you correct.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

    I get what you're saying, but think about this from Layton's perspective: In order to not suffer too much criticism from his base for having caved into the Conservatives just like those craven, cowardly Liberals, he needs to at least maintain the illusion that his support for the government will result in something that he can take to the electorate as evidence that he Got Things Done For Ordinary Canadians. The fact that Giorno didn't bother to reply surprises exactly no one who has been paying attention to the government's response to every NDP overture so far; the fact that the NDP would go public with the evidence suggests that they may be trying to position themselves as The Party That Tried, But Was Stymied By Those Awful Conservatives.

    • http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com bigcitylib

      If the NDP is already saying Tuesday that they will support Tory's Friday that means they're desperate and its a wrap and this is all complaining to wheedle a tiny something extra out of Harper and Co.

      Frankly, more interesting than what Layton's doing is the Bloc's latest half promise of support. I haven't quite figured that one out yet. Trying to isolate Iggy et al?

      PS. There is nothing worse than being pummelled in the polls because that means you LOSE YOUR JOB.

  • Vince Clortho

    Lets see where this goes. I can't imagine that the NDP would pull the plug in a fit of pique over a non returned email.

    It is plausible that the cons leaked it, for reasons indicated above

    It is plausible that the NDP leaked it and are trying to make a case that the governemnt is engaging in deeper discussions, therefore they are weak and have accepted the Don Layton's kiss and embrace…therefore they belong with other "notaleaders"

    Tories seem intent on having the accomodation take place in Parliament, fits their strategy, should fit the NDP strategy as well…they will MPW and no back room deals. But there is that piece about the "socialist" kiss…Jack wanted a photo op at some point…

    Oh heck it still could be either….as time wasting as Sudoko

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    Slightly off-topic.. but Harris Decima's new poll release shows status quo #'s from last week.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/AJR79 AJR79

      The HD poll was part of a rolling poll that started on Aug. 27th

      Check out the new Angus-Reid poll.

      I for one hope that a 12 point Tory advantage in Ontario is the new status quo.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

    What NDP support?

    But I'm certainly open to persuasion, as always.

    You're note even open to reality.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

    Not socialist chess, Ms. O'Malley – socialist poker.

    The New Democrats aren't going to win many disaffected Conservative voters, and vice-versa. Layton has no need to alienate his own base and screw over the EI legislation just to try and make the Conservatives look bad. If you're voting New Democrat you probably already think Harper is our very own Canadian anti-christ anyway. And neither party particularly has any interest in forcing an election.

    So the question is "who will blink first and try to look like they're Cooperating in the Spirit of New Cooperative Cooperation Government?" With the ridiculous EI reform bill I think the Conservatives are already grabbing their ankles, but apparently the NDP thinks they can get more.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

    I have to say that the EI changes being proposed don't strike me as appealing to NDP voters, given that they don't do much for the most economically disadvantaged.

    Maybe Layton's playing chess too, after all.

    • http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com bigcitylib

      I'd say the opposite. These changes effect very few people, I am told, but they would be concentrated in the automotive/lumber sectors. NDP ridings, in other words.

  • John W.

    Maybe a photographer will get a shot of Layton on his knees begging.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

    Jack Layton's dream scenario is to defer an election indefinitely, while at the same time showing his base that by winning EI concessions from the Conservatives, he is delivering the goods to hard-working (but temporarily non-working) Canadians at their kitchen tables.

  • Bryan L.

    The only party in Ottawa who want an election right now is the CPC. Ironic.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

      Nonsense. Harper has the most to lose from the next election, starting with his job.

      • Bryan L.

        Perhaps. But with a 9 point lead, and a majority possible, and being able to blame the Libs for another election, I would suggest that he also has the most to gain and is eager to try.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

          So you actually buy what Ispos is selling? You do know that today's Decima poll has them statistically tied as do all other polls worth their salt, yes?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/CanadianSense CanadianSense

        Did you also predict Dion and the Greenshift were going to be winners?

  • Vince Clortho

    "…the goods to hard-working (but temporarily non-working) Canadians at their kitchen tables.."….which were built in Canada out of Canadian wood.

    • Dakota

      …..and which were quite expensive because of high union labor costs, but should be fully paid for in about three years with monthly payments.

    • tobyornottoby

      Which were imported from China because Canadian trees are either chipped into little pieces to make toilet paper and packaging, shipped somewhere as raw logs by companies that consider cutting rights as an asset they can trade at will.

  • Vince Clortho

    What Jack wants is a photo of him and Harper shaking hands on this kind of thing with Duceppe slightly ou of focus in background somehwere smiling.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

    Yeah, they're totally acting like they want an election by shoving tailor-made NDP bills onto the table while, when Ignatieff said that he'd vote against confidence motions (giving no sign that he cared what was in the confidence motions), he showed that he had no interest in an election at all.

    Also, not sure the word "ironic" means what you think it means. That's not even Alanis Morrissette ironic.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

      Oh, I'd agree that the Liberals want an election — not because they think they can win, but because they think they can pull off a better result than last time, and position themselves to win the next time around. But the Conservatives do, indeed, want an election — the ones around here, anyway. All this sanctimonious bleating about how it's unnecessary is just priming the pump. I don't blame them for doing it, but it's silly to pretend that they're not.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

        Arguing with a woman whose blog is named "Inside the Queensway" about the goings-on inside the Queensway seems like running onto the highway to argue with a truck. But that's not going to stop me, apparently!

        I don't deny the Conservatives are preparing for an election. The fact that I can't walk seven steps without hearing about the coalition with the separatists and the socialists, or the economy and how the Conservatives would never dare call a needless election during the recovery, and all that rhetoric makes it pretty obvious. But that's not necessarily because they're seeking to drop the writ, but it's because they're sane.

        In the House, the Conservatives seem to be… well, "conciliatory" is entirely the wrong word, but perhaps "not as completely antagonistic as usual" will do. They're offering Jack just enough of a bone with the EI thing that he might bite, and they were trying to pull the same trick with Ignatieff for months until he pulled his support. They wouldn't turn down an election if it came but if they really wanted one they could have it pretty easily.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/psiclone psiclone

          I agree wholeheartedly – time to be honest Harper is in the catbird seat right now and simply doesn't have to bother either way. Harper can focus all of his energy on taking care of business and building up IOU's and wins either way knowing that there definitely will be an election next budget and in the meantime watch Layton and Duceppe try to carve out disaffected liberals, all the while playing whackamole with all of the other leaders. Why on earth go to an election now with all those undecided out there (see Nanos Poll 25%) he can attempt to get some love from Obama keep swatting away the other leaders and get all of his legislation passed. So when you get right down to it – life is good for a Conservative in the House right now – and it must be downright uncomfortable to be a Lib or NDP'er.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

          Not if they're serious about the whole "give us a majority, or give us (electoral) death (at the hands of that diabolical coalition)" pitch. They've got to make it look like Stephen Harper has been ready, willing and able to work with the other parties, and wants nothing more than to keep shepherding the country through the recession, but the opposition parties, acting out of pure self interest and misguided opportunism, are going to force us all to the polls anyway.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            "They've got to make it look like Stephen Harper has been ready, willing and able to work with the other parties, and wants nothing more than to keep shepherding the country through the recession, but the opposition parties, acting out of pure self interest and misguided opportunism, are going to force us all to the polls anyway."

            Kady, are we talking about the same Harper who pulled the plug last year knowing full well that he was defying his own legislation? You actually think that he cares that much about appearances?

            I think that the desperate calls on the part of Harper for a majority are genuine. I'm not sure why people continue to believe that he has such a strong lock on his caucus that they would allow him to continue to lead them into more elections when he has shown that he cannot deliver a majority.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

            But couldn't they do that with a bill that pandered to the Conservative base rather than the left-Liberal/New Democrat base?

            Say that Harper stood up in the House of Commons and said "we are introducing a bill to reduce small business taxes by nine grillion percent, because the last thing our entrepreneurs need in these hard times is the government picking their pocket". No way he wins that confidence vote, but how does it not look like a serious, real effort to solve an economic problem that the evil opposition shot down so they could create their Coalition of Evil?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

            Because I think Harper is starting to realize that Canadians actually want to see our government cooperate, not just one party stand up and try to ramrod through legislation no matter how much it might appeal to them. So they need it to be a bill that appeals to one of the other parties.

          • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            "They've got to make it look like Stephen Harper has been ready, willing and able to work with the other parties, and wants nothing more than to keep shepherding the country through the recession, but the opposition parties, acting out of pure self interest and misguided opportunism, are going to force us all to the polls anyway."

            Kady, are we talking about the same Harper who pulled the plug last year knowing full well that he was defying his own legislation? You actually think that he cares that much about appearances? If Harper wanted an election, he wouldn't be going through this charade.

            I think that the desperate calls on the part of Harper for a majority are genuine. I'm not sure why people continue to believe that he has such a strong lock on his caucus that they would allow him to continue to lead them into more elections when he has shown that he cannot deliver a majority.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

            What on earth has given you the impression that Harper cares about other than appearances?

            What Harper seems to have proven very apt at, however, is judging which appearances matter. He's also cottoned on that right after an election grants him some freebie time to get away with all kinds of things. That's why it was right after the election that we got Fortier, softwood lumber, and income trust taxation.

            It's also why it was right after an election that we got the FU to Canada.. but he pushed it too far that time.. not with the Canadian public, but with the other parties. You can rest assured he won't make that mistake again. Now, however, we're far enough away from the last election that the things he does might stick to the next one.. so now's when it becomes important to watch the appearances.

            That said, I totally agree with you about his need for a majority.. but then again, I was saying that last election too and was proven wrong. I think partially because I neglected to look at what there was for talent in the party after Harper, but partially because I underestimated the how sheep-like most of Harper's followers truely are.

          • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            Thwim, it just feels to me that people tend to go overboard with Harper's so-called supreme-chess-master-extraordinaire-here-me-roar stuff.

            I don't think that it is that complicated. Harper was planning to engineer his own defeat next year, around the budget, not now. The conditions are not optimal for a solid victory. The fact of the matter is that no one can say for certain that the Tories would remain in power.

            So why would he be eager to go to the polls? I think that the EI deal is exactly as it appears to be and that is an olive branch to anyone willing to take it. I don't even think that Harper planned on the NDP's response.

          • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

            Thwim, it just feels to me that people tend to go overboard with Harper's so-called supreme-chess-master-extraordinaire-hear-me-roar stuff.

            I don't think that it is that complicated. Harper was planning to engineer his own defeat next year, around the budget, not now. The conditions are not optimal for a solid victory. The fact of the matter is that no one can say for certain that the Tories would remain in power.

            So why would he be eager to go to the polls? I think that the EI deal is exactly as it appears to be and that is an olive branch to anyone willing to take it. I don't even think that Harper planned on the NDP's response.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

            You may have better insight, but I think the Cons arent afraid of one, but I am not sure they seek one.

            It really is all about signalling etc. A evolutionary biologist might do better analysis on this rather than a standard political science analysis. You know, coloured plummage, expanding quills, are they looking to avoid fights, trying to attract mates or be a predator or some combination of the above.

            Maybe the cons have a great campaign mapped out, maybe they have what they have tested as killer ads. Maybe they have some extroidinary policies that they think will knock the socks off everyone…..generally those magic bulletts dont exist. And it does appear that the Liberals would be renewed, and Iggy endorsed following an improved Liberal standing. Why would they want that? along with risking wither a coalition or at a minimum an Accord based government like Peterson-Rae. A stronger NDP is less risky for the Cons.

    • the realist

      Ignatieff was gambling that other parties wanted an election less than he did. What he wanted and got was freedom for the liberal party to be the opposition. Turns out he was right about his gamble. The NDP will compromise any principle to avoid an election and the conservatives will stoop to bribing the NDP in order not to appear to be the ones to blame if there is an election. In the meantime Ignatieff has finally been able to withdraw from the coalition with the conservatives he was forced into (cant have an election if you have no money and no ground troops: The liberal party now has more than 100000 members, enough cash on hand to fight an election and the organisation in place to raise more. ) He has done quite a remarkable job in view of the desperate situation he inherited last december.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

        Yes indeed, well done Liberals to escape Harper's fatal embrace w/o triggering an election.
        Check!

        (even if there is an election call now, it will be ludicrous to call it Iggy's fault.)

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/CanadianSense CanadianSense

        You are comparing a 2008 to 2009. How does it compare against the CPC?

        The Liberals are not prepared in nominations or funding. If it costs $ 30 million for a full campaign. Have they paid their leadership debts? Have they repaid their loans? How much does that leave the Liberal party?

        Did they just spend $ 2 million on TV ads this year? Last year they spent $ 4.5 million in 2008. They raised most of their funds from Big Fish who will NOT be able to donate anymore.

        But 38.1% of the money raised in the first half of 2009 has come from 1,954 contributors who have now given $1,000 or more, meaning they can't contribute any more money for the rest of the year, and 49.6% of it was raised from 2,635 contributors who have given $800 or more.

        This contrasts with 6.3% of Conservative contributions and 3.1% of NDP contributions coming from 474 and 49 donors respectively who have given $1,000 or more; and 13.8% of Conservative contributions and 4.0% of NDP contributions coming from 1,105 and 81 donors respectively who have given $800 or more.

        http://punditsguide.ca/

        The other parties have more opportunities to increase their donations.

  • Mulletaur

    Funny how received wisdom among the punditry not so long ago was that Iggy couldn't force an election on his own. It looks like a logique de guerre has set in, started by the Liberals.

  • Bryan L.

    Your Lordship. Ironic is when Harper stands up in the House and rails against having an election when in reality his party wants on the most. Perhaps you should take some deep breaths before you type things. So much anger out there. Wow.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

      I do owe you an apology for my comment on irony. I misunderstood your meaning.

      I do stand by my analysis, though, although I won't rehash my Kady-directed insane rambling below.

  • officerfarva

    Whack!
    Please sir, may I have another?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

    The Conservatives have offered a few crumbs to the NDP in comparison to the initial NDP proposal in the spring, enough to do some window dressing. The CPC has virtually no desire to be seen in the same ballpark as the NDP and BQ, because they're concerned with how it will affect their coalition message whenever the writ is dropped. Similarly, the NDP seems to be actually considering whether it's worth losing a ton of seats rather than trying to explain why after spending over three years chortling about how anti-Conservative they were that they propped up the government to save their own rear ends from getting whooped in an election.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

    There's no need for all of this emailing because Andrew Coyne told me there'll be no election.

    • Gawd

      and y'all heard it from me first

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

      I sense nothing but complete, sincere honestly in this comment.

    • Mulletaur

      See, Coyne was right – at least for now.

From Macleans