Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

UPDATED AGAIN: Hark! Is that the rare, sweet sound of parliament working?

by kadyomalley on Thursday, September 17, 2009 2:38pm - 100 Comments

According to the Globe and Mail, peace may be about to break out in the House of Commons:

The four parties in the House of Commons are nearing a deal to fast track the government’s new employment-insurance legislation and put it to its first vote as early as Friday.

Government House Leader Jay Hill invited his Liberal, NDP and Bloc Québécois counterparts to a closed door meeting just after noon to discuss the government bill, which was officially introduced in the House of Commons Wednesday afternoon.

The Liberals announced Thursday morning that they are offering to pass the bill quickly, in the hope of taking away the NDP’s stated reason for keeping the Conservatives in office for the short term.

“We don’t want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

Following the meeting, NDP House Leader Libby Davies told The Globe and Mail that all sides are close to a deal and that negotiations are expected to continue throughout the day. [...]

Will the much-anticipated EI reform bill make it through the House in time to allow the NDP to vote its conscience on the next confidence motion to come before the House? Tune in later today to find out!

UPDATE: No deal — yet. During his traditional response to the Thursday question, Jay Hill told the House that he had called a meeting of house leaders following the motions from the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois earlier today, and had been “hopeful” that they would have worked something out by now, but “one of the parties” is still looking at the offer currently on the table, which would send the bill to committee by Friday afternoon.

WHEELS-WITHIN-WHEELS-UPDATE:

Okay. so here’s what I was able to glean from a brief post-QP foray to the foyer: The party holding up the deal to finish up with second reading by tomorrow afternoon is …. drum roll … the Bloc Quebecois! No, Duceppe hasn’t suddenly been seized with a case of the electoral vapors; it may actually be a very clever move.

If the bill goes to committee next week, the Bloc can issue an open invite to Quebec union leaders to come forth and voice their near universal outrage over the paucity of the proposed measures, thus fortifying the party against any future accusation that they failed to stand up for unemployed Quebeckers — and since the House wasn’t scheduled to sit anyway, it’s not like it would drag out the process; the bill could, in theory, be reported back the following Monday, and make it through third reading by Wednesday afternoon, make a brief stop in the Other Place for a sober second look, and be primed and ready for Royal Assent by the end of the week.

Depending on when the government tables the final stimulus update — which has to happen sometime during the week of September 28th, according to the June agreement — that could, in theory, allow the NDP to vote against the government when the Liberal confidence motion drops two days later.

Tags: about that election we weren't going to have, c'mon jack - get happy!, employment insurance

More by kadyomalley

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

Guess I'm free next Wednesday night then. Who's playing at the Rex?

Riley Hennessey

How bout you move the venue to New Brunswick or elsewhere in Atlantic Canada. Why's it always got to be Toronto where the good public debates are held? Geez.

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

There'll be other installments in the road show. We'll certainly get as far east as Montreal, and maybe a good deal farther east than that.

Riley Hennessey

For the record, Atlantic Canadians do not consider Montreal as "east", let alone "far east". But I've got my fingers crossed that you and Coyne make it out to our neck of the forest.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Trevor Hogg Trio, featuring Trevor Hogg, at 9:30pm.

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

Sounds OK. But I'm missing Kirk Macdonald and Pat LaBarbera on Thursday-Saturday! I never get to have any fun.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

You mean you aren't sticking around for McGuinty's surprise announcement on Friday? About high speed rail and U of T?

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

Guess I'm free next Wednesday night then. Who's playing at the Rex?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

“We don’t want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

The politic optics of that statement are interesting. Is that not going to look like someone too anxious for power? The presumption being that parliament has fall at the earliest possible moment?

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

Well, if a party proclaims that it has lost confidence in the government, that's actually a consistent position to take.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

It is a consistent line for the Liberals, but the expectation that the NDP must follow their lead, it is the optics of that, that I wonder about.

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

So far, the NDP line has been that they will support the government until the money starts to flow. As far as I know, they haven't withdrawn their previous (79, as they used to like to remind us) votes of non-confidence.

RayK

No, it's just most voices in the media are–prematurely–behaving as if that's exactly what the NDP are doing.

(That's not your falut, of course. You're pointing out the contrary, but I can see how Ed would have gotten a different impression.)

http://intensedebate.com/people/Be_rad Be_rad

I think it is interesting from another perspective: if you believe the he believes that he can't possibly, really want an election to start right now, it's one hell of a bluff.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

I double, double dare ya!

But Mike is kind of committed to that position now, isn't he?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Be_rad Be_rad

That's just it – his best outcome having staked himself to this new position is that he continues to sound like he is opposing and not going to prop the government up while at the same time praying that the NDP also recognize the value of staying alive until the battle ground is more advantageous. So he has to sound tough but manage his ulcers at the same time.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

“We don’t want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

The political optics of that statement are interesting. Is that not going to look like someone too anxious for power? The presumption being that parliament has fall at the earliest possible moment?
an online reader

When harper's away Jay Hill will play ?
David Akin, Canwest News Service
Published: Thursday, September 03, 2009
"OTTAWA — There will be no "backroom deals" to avoid a fall federal election, Prime Minister Stephen Harper " "And Prime Minister Stephen Harper called on Canadians to elect a majority Conservative government to "teach" his political opponents and "their little coalition" a lesson. "

Promise made , promise kept .

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

Don't worry, I'm sure Dennis will be along soon to argue that just because it's behind closed doors doesn't mean it's a back-room. It may be a room in the front, after all. And we can't know for sure that any deal has been struck anyway.

an online reader

Why not rent The House of Commons out for weddings ?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

If you're talking about me:

a) I'm not in the practice of making absurd statements. Sorry.

b) Why in the world are you talking about me? lol

John

Could it be that "a" is at least borderline absurd?

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

I would imagine that when the Liberals bring in their motion it can be worded in a way (perhaps purposely) that the NDP could say they don't have confidence in the government, but cannot support the motion as it doens't reflect NDP views.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

WDM, sorry, but I have to say that for some reason every time I see your post, I always think I'm seeing WMD. Too much Bush brainwashing… and many acronyms in the business/government world.

In response to your post, yeah, Iggy libs will likely figure out how to exploit this situation to get himself out of the pickle he's in.

Bonnie N

Kady
Now I hate to sound cynical but this bill is so complicated and convoluted shouldn't parliamentarians review the promised numbers before passing it?

Just asking…

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

Well, they could always bring in departmental officials to provide a technical briefing during committee of the whole, or at committee if it lands there.
http://intensedebate.com/people/ottawasteph ottawasteph

Begging to differ, Bonnie. C-50 is one of the simplest that I've seen: http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/17/hark-is-that-t…

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

“We don’t want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

Added Ignatieff, "U-G-L-Y, Jack ain't got no alibi, he ugly, he ugly."

What people are missing is that the Liberals and the NDP will be voting together on this issue. COALITION! COALITION! DEMOCRACY IS DEAD. Okay, maybe the last couple weeks has made me a little knee-jerk cynical.

the realist

I am way ahead of you. I have been a cynic (or realist) for a long time. I must admit the shear effrontery of Layton's position has managed to surprise even me. I follow the rule that I should always assume the worst. I am right most of the time (as with Layton) and pleasantly surprised on very rare occasions.

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

Actually, I can understand Layton doing this from an idealistic perspective. If you really believe that EI reform is critically important – as Layton seems to – then voting against this for petty political reasons is a dirtbag move. Even if you think that this EI bill isn't a full solution, it makes more sense to take what you can get now and reform later rather than spend a minimum of three weeks in campaign mode plus another week or two for a new government to get its act together where nothing happens.

I don't believe for a second Layton or the NDP think that way, and their entire history up to this point suggests they're voting with the Conservatives for purely political reasons. But you can see it in quite a nice light, if you want to.

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

But I thought Iggy claimed Harper's time was up? I don't get it … how can he pass legislation and drive his agenda while Iggy stands there like a deer caught in the headlights. Oh Well … I guess when Iggy finished with messing with him and what with the tight leash on Harper maybe Iggy decided that probation time was up – sorry Iggy but you are starting to confuse me. Does anyone else get the feeling that now that Iggy has basically made himself irerlevant and according to the polls coming you can see Harper up a bit and Layton up a bit and Iggy down a bit well shouldn't be too surprised I guess ..

John

Sure your name isn't cyclone, what with that particular spin?
Old School Liberal

He is speeding up the process, moving the vote date up so it can be voted on, waiving certain procedure. I could be wrong, but I haven't read anywhere that he will be voting in favour of Harper like the NDP.
http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

The Liberals voted for the budget. It makes sense for them to support passage of the budget implementation measures. Indeed, it is inconsistent for them to vote against.

My advice to them (which will not be accepted no doubt) is to abstain on this one. Otherwise they will be giving a gift to the government, which will now be able to run ads saying Mike Igantieff voted against the home reno tax credit.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

Question: Could there have been a more delicate way for Iggy to stop promising support for Harper while at the same time not marrying himself to constant opposition on every vote of confidence?

Sure, he's turned the tables on the other opposition parties, but might it have come at a bit too high of a price? Did he box himself into a corner of a different sorts?

the realist

The logic is a follows: while they study the EI legislation ad nauseam the NDP can say that they have to keep supporting Harper so as not to disappoint the dozen or so unemployed the bill will help. That would keep Harper in power for the fall and probably the winter. Ignatieff's move would ensure swift passage and remove any justification Layton has for continuing to support the government that is until he made another one up or Harper threw a few more crumbs his way.

ctm

It is scary to see how bad of a leader Iggy is, can his people help him out, he is a train wreck and the fall will be even harder than Dion's since he is supposed to be quite the intellectual…he is never going to be PM, and it is alll his doing, he has made a mess of an already messy party….

Dakota

Ignatieff – "I will not be voting to keep this Government in power any longer…except this one time, and maybe a few more times if my polling numbers don't rise soon…but then I really won't be voting…I will be abstaining."

http://intensedebate.com/people/IanBC IanBC

It's OK if you don't understand what's going on, Dakota. Just ask.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Dennis_F Dennis_F

“We don’t want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

I guess Iggy has abandoned any desire to raise the level of discourse in Parliament.

Gawd

yeah he could have been prime minister but be turned it down

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

I'm now officially confused. By my impartial reckoning, the Liberals shouldn't want an election, yet they are doing their damnedest to provoke one; the Tories should want an election, yet they are getting into bed with the NDP; the NDP is giving away their Antiharper cred; has the world gone mad? Perhaps it's all just posturing, but from all three sides at once? Or maybe I've failed to appreciate the key dynamic somehow.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Be_rad Be_rad

Or they're all trying to play three dimensional chess on a snakes 'n ladders board…
Dakota

Maybe Harvard has a position opening up on staff that Ignatieff really wants…he could be home before Christmas.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Douglass Douglass

That line is getting old Dakota.

ctm

Not really!!!

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

Libs and Harpers think the worst of the recession is over, both want to be in place to claim credit for the ride thereafter.

The NDP know that with the anti-Dion sentiment no longer being present, Liberals will likely come out to vote again, which will cost them a number of seats, I guess they figure more seats than dropping their anti-harper stance will cost.
http://intensedebate.com/people/IanBC IanBC

Jack, my suspicion is that the Liberals simply are anxious to have the NDP vote with the government on their motion of non-confidence in October, but want to take away their excuse about keeping them alive until the EI bill passes. "No alibis" as Iggy said. (It doesn't have to be true, it just has to be plausible.) But I can't even win at two dimensional chess, so maybe there's a lot of layers I'm missing.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Good point, Ian. It will be interesting to see if Harper gives the NDP another alibi.
http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

I concur Ian.

civil servant

Also, there's a news story today about a Progressive Conservative in Ontario calling for increased regulation. Officially, Hudak hasn't endorsed it yet, but the Premier has come out swinging that there isn't a need for regulation. I don't think the world's gone mad, but it is edging closer to it.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

And yesterday Bob Rae was attacking the Government for increased payroll taxes, and Baird could only froth a bit. I'm stocking up on canned corn.

Gawd

if you're feeling confused what to do is strategically vote conservative and it will solve all your problems

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

I am missing something in the plot here…..what would Layton need an alibi for? Not voting for it?

Has the messing stopped yet?

Dakota

Ignatieff thinks he is cheating on him…
Lord Kitchener's Own

The idea here is that the NDP are using the fig leaf of "EI reform is really super important to us, and it needs to get passed, so we need to support the Tories to get it passed" as their excuse for supporting the government they used to mock the Liberals for supporting. In other words, the Liberals want to fast-track this, let Layton support the government on this vote, and then watch Layton scramble to come up with his next "alibi" for why he's gonna support the government on the NEXT vote (and, presumably, the one after that….).

I guess the thinking is that it'll be much tougher on Layton explaining why he's propping up the government then it will be on Ignatieff explaining why he's not.

We'll see.
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

Yes, basically. If the EI legislation is given Royal Assent, the NDP cannot vote with the government in order to ensure the money starts flowing, since it will have already done so.

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

ITQ and Lord Kichener ride to the rescue with an explanaition….many thanks. Must be the head cold preventing me from seeing the ripples in the political space time continium right now.

Thanks again.

the realist

I think maybe Ignatieff is enjoying the opportunity to torture Layton and what could be more painful for him than having to support Harper. Actually forcing Layton to listen to some of his own speaches would be more painful, but fortunately that is a form of toture most can avoid. I am not so lucky since, living in Toronto/Danforth I am sometimes (Taste of the Danforth, Greek independance day etc) subjected to this incidious form of toture by accident.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Ah, thanks, Thwim, you nailed it. The recovery. That's it.

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

Yeah. Personally I think those beliefs are going to prove to be short-lived. We seem to have forgotten that wealth comes from production, not from the financiers manipulating money. As soon as interest rates start to rise again, the rather huge increases we've had in unemployment lately will begin to make themselves known, and not in a polite or pretty fashion.

"Death spiral" may be an ugly term, but I've a growing fear it may be the accurate one.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Couldn't agree more. We may well have a recovery, but if we don't start thinking long-term we're in serious trouble. (Of course we may be in serious trouble anyway, if the Americans don't get their act together, but that's out of our hands.) Which is my #1 reason for fearing & loathing this Minority Government Era, for which I blame the Bloc, bless 'em: too much mêlée-ing on the poopdeck = big problems for HMCS Canada.

John

That would be "farruca on the forecastle".

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

As soon as interest rates start to rise again, the rather huge increases we've had in unemployment lately will begin to make themselves known

Could you explain those economics for me? Why the interest rate increases? Why will unemployment not be a factor until then?

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

1. Credit card interest.
2. Banks generally don't want to be in the real-estate business, so if you're having trouble meeting the payment terms on your mortgage and interest rates are low, they've got room to give you leeway. Extend your credit, maybe get you to refinance at lower terms, that kind of thing. Once interest rates start to go up, they don't have the room to make those kind of deals.
3. Low interest rates prompt investors to get out of bonds and money-market plays and move into equities. Equity funding is actually helping to prop up various companies. Higher interest rates mean that funding pulls out and companies start having to live on what they can sell.. but with masses of unemployed, they're not selling much.

Roll it all into a big ball and you've got rising interest rates lowering housing value on top of banks having to take on houses as foreclosures increase, thus lowering their liquid flow to lend while money comes out of equities and companies close up because they can't afford to continue operating because nobody's buying their stuff because they don't have jobs or access to cheap credit to finance it.

So why do interest rates have to go up? Because we're taking on increasing amounts of debt and deficit as a country, and to fund that, we have to sell bonds, which.. unless they have a decent interest rate.. aren't attractive to investors. That's the kicker, we need to pull the investors out of the equities to prop up our deficit and debt spending to boost the economy, but its the equity investors who are propping up the economy as it is because the unemployed aren't buying stuff.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

1. Credit card interest, if anything, is beginning to go down, and in any case has at most a marginal effect on the whole economy.
2. Banks certainly do want to be in the real estate business. In Canada real estate has provided excellent security, even in the midst of a global meltdown in real estate value.
3. The choice to go with bonds v. equities has many many factors. Certainly right now, the bond market is in much better shape than the equities market.

None of 1,2, 3 will do anything to interest rates, which are tightly bound to money supply and currency values. Increased foreclosures? In Canada? Increases over the past year's record? Are you serious?

As for the argument regarding increasing debt and its effect on interest rates, that makes a lot of sense, though there are other factors. So how do we avoid that increasing debt? In truth, it is not likely to be a problem for a number of years because Canada is in a relatively good position as far a debt load goes and we can always play off currency value for lower interest rates, but it will come back to haunt us if federal spending increases remain at 6% for any length of time.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

1. Of course it's beginning to go down.. with fed interest rates in general near 0% right now, the availability of practically free money and competition between card markers suggests that interest rates will be going down on them. That's the point. When the fed rates go up, the interest on cards will go up, thus tightening the buying power of unemployed Canadians.
2. Uh.. no. That's exactly the thinking that brought this mess on, and most of the banks have cottoned on to that. Check out the foreclosure ghettos in the states. Prices fall like a rock because banks get stuck with houses that nobody can afford. If you think our banks watched that happen in the US and didn't think, "what if that starts happening here", you have a far lower opinion of them then even I do. But once it starts, the further the prices fall, the more write-downs the banks have to do which affects their lending capabilities. Real-estate has provided a hedge here so far because we've hardly moved. Check out http://www.chpc.biz/ for more info, and to see where we're heading. These low interest rates allow our banks to prop up the over-extended mortgagees. A rise in interest rates will precipitate the collapse. So yes, I'm very serious with increases over last year's record.

Why? It all boils down to this: "Even at the zenith of the US housing bubble, prices peaked around $250,000 US while incomes were around $47,000 US. In Canada, incomes are $44,000 and prices are now at $326,613." We're still in the midst of a massive housing bubble, even with the minor correction we saw earlier.

I'm not saying any of these reasons will do anything to interest rates, I'm saying what interest rates will do to them.

And yes, the bond market is in better shape.. think about that.. with basically 0% interest the bond market is in better shape. But that doesn't mean the government doesn't have to attract even more money into them in order to fund its debt spending, so it has to increase their rates.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

The whole reason we didn't experience a collapse in the real estate market was that our banking regulations don't allow that highly leveraged mortgage instrument that you rightly identify as the culprit in the US, not exactly a stirring revelation. So a collapse in real estate at this stage is extremely unlikely. If it was going to happen it would have, and those prices are already recovering.

If there is a doomsday scenario, it would be the debt situation in the US causing a long term economic crisis there, with spill-over effects on Canada. In that regard, Ignatieff is right to look for increased foreign markets, but that is hardly a novel idea either, as outlined elsewhere in this thread.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Hmm. I seem to remember somebody else saying "If it was going to happen, it would have."

How'd that turn out?

The US collapse happened earlier due to their even crazier lending schemes, true enough. And because of that we forestalled our own by the unprecedented drop in interest rates. But the bottom line is that the average price of housing simply isn't affordable compared to the average wage. This is exacerbated by job-losses, and will become apparant when interest rates rise and mortgagors have no room to extend credit or delay payments.
http://twitter.com/ChrisInKW @ChrisInKW

Orgy of free money is going to come to an end soon. What of all these poor schlubs with their VRMs with no money down who can barely make the payments with these low low rates? Google "no deposit mortgage canada"… quite a few lenders come up. Should we be afraid? Or shall we keep singing the refrain but it's different in Canada?
http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Good synopsis Thwim; which, at the beginning is why the recession started in the first place (starting at #2 especially in the U.S.).

Derek

The Liberals can play a few games and maybe even over-play their hand in trying to make Layton eat crow. In the end it won't matter. Whenever we do have an election it will be because the opposition parties all vote nonconfidence and then that will be all that matters and no one will care who voted how on previous votes.

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

I don't think so when Iggy stood up in Sudbury and declared to one and all = harper Your Time Is Up! – as of that moment he took the fall he said in the loudest voice possible Blame ME!

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

I have just had an epiphany! It isn't a pleasant idea that just popped into my mind but I thought I would post the following question and see if anyone else out there finds it plausible. What IF! ….. I mean What IF? what if we are all and I mean all of us media pundits, political junkees and citizen's one and all being played for the fools that we may just be. After all folks this perpetual election specualtion eternal could be a hndy little thing to use if you were a politician(s) … what IF? There was never any really desire for an election by anyone of the leaders and what IF? they took conspiracy to a whole new level knowing cnadaians all too well – as if you think about each leader right now has moves his base really likes and a few they sort of don't like …. how often has this ever happened before – quicjkly adjusting my tin foil hat – I wonder if the leaders are having a nice laugh at all of us – becuase the more election specualtion going on the more they can FUNDRAISE!!!!!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

That doesn't work for the Conservatives, they currently have a competitive advantage in that area.

Bonnie N

I don't know but the Conservative meme on EI seems to be workers under 35 are not as desperate as workers over the age of 35.

Hmm? Never trust anyone under 30… Or is the narrative they don't vote so who cares?

I just find this legislation very unfair with the threshold they have put forward. It is generation older people vs. younger people who just won a 56 billion dollar debt for their kids. You guys should be mad as hell.

Personally i believe this bill is to buy votes from autoworkers in Ontario.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

lol !
Gawd

Watchdog failed to show 2008 vote illegal: Federal Court

the realist

Where did that come from?

Gawd

Mwahahahahahahahahaha!

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

I thought you guys didn't like it when the criminal gets off on a technicality?

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

A lack of evidence is not a technicality.

Gawd

think i need a secretary to type my blog posts
http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

Why is it that Parliament starts working as soon as the Liberals decide to take their ball and go home?

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

ROFL LMAO! If I could bump up your numbers on top more than 1 I would – well done
http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

I have often wondered why the Pratt and Taylor sports radio show, here in Vancouver, gets so dramatically better whenever Pratt is away.
http://intensedebate.com/people/NorthernPoV NorthernPoV

The way I see it: Iggy's brilliant escape from Harper changed the board dramatically enough to actually shake something (albeit a really small something) loose from the PMO.
So the little bit of work getting done after months of parliamentary stalemate is entirely thanks to …. the Liberals!

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

And it only cost them 5 points in the polls.

Totally worth it

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

I would argue on the a specific point of order.

Cojones were cut a long time ago.

officerfarva

It appears that the Bloc are fairly adept at playing "le chess" too.

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

you ever hear of pawn in passing becuase it owuld be a good example?

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

Is it almost safe to pull out the party hats yet?

I can't be the only one thinking there is no real chance of an election before next years budget.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

so here’s what I was able to glean from a brief post-QP foray to the foyer

very poetical. You could use that as a book title, something like Inside the Queensway: Forays in the Foyers
http://intensedebate.com/people/CanadianSense CanadianSense

The CPC can't appear to be protecting the NDP from Liberal or Bloc attacks. If the three opposition parties on hell bent to call each other names, the best thing for the government is to let them at each other.

The key is to NOT seen a the reason for an election. The theatre by the opposition tripping over each other blaming each other is great for MSM editorials.

I think Iggy can't whip his MP's to vote against the EI Bill so he is trying to flush out the NDP.

an online reader

You have record # of unemployed , underemployed and workers that need retraining . All agree some jobs gone forever . Each party has M.P.s that specialize in human resources and skill developement . . They all sit mute or in limbo .

Theater , house whips and chains group meeting into the wee hours and party spin meisters are busy . This is a good thing ? PMO & all parties agree Parliament is functioning .