Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

This just in from the school cafeteria

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, June 10, 2010 9:01am - 29 Comments

So Warren says that Alf told him that someone said something to Ed and Roy. And John says that Alf told him that Jean talked to Ed and Roy and Joe. But Alf says he’s only talked to Warren and John and that he only heard about Jean and Ed because Warren told him. Anyway. Hopefully the guys at the West Beverly Blaze will figure it all out soon.

Tags: Alf Apps, coalition, coalition government, Ed Broadbent, Jean Chretien, Joe Clark, liberals, NDP, Roy Romanow, This week in bullshit, Warren Kinsella

More by Aaron Wherry

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

Come on Wherrry. This is Canada, would it have killed you to make it a Degrassi reference?

Lord Kitchener's Own

I agree.

And those punks at the Blaze are all hacks.
Dan

In the words of Degrassi's premier new wave band The Zit Remedy, or the Zits as they were later called…

"Everybody face up to facts as they are. Dedication is hard, but you'll be a somebody, and you'll go far!"
http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

he has more respect for the institution that is degreassi than to demean it by assoication with this bs.

Anon 001

I can't figure out the affidavit thing. If Warren Kinsella is so worried about people challenging his veracity, why doesn't he just pull a Snowdy and start taping/videotaping these "senior people?"

Wait a second, what if he already has?
http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

Initially, I was inclined to say that all this merger/coalition gossip had the strength of a high school rumor mill.

Now, I'm not even sure it's that mature.
wilson

Chretien had the blessings, in 2008, of the entire LPC caucus to negotiate with Broadbent, and nothing has changed,
except it's supposed to be done under the radar.

How about that Joe Clark trying to rescue the progressives with a little bit of socialism in the mix!
Don't forget to count heads before the vote Joe!

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

Nothing other than complete and outright denial from all sides. You win again wilson.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tobyornotoby tobyornotoby

Affidavit? Can we no longer have a public discussion without resorting to lawyers?

AJT

We can.
Lord Kitchener's Own

Actually, I think this is proof that one is not necessarily safe having a PRIVATE conversation without resorting to lawyers. Was there anything "public" about this conversation between Kinsella and Apps before Kinsella started talking to reporters about it?
http://intensedebate.com/profiles/tigerinexile Ben (The Tiger)

Well, in fairness, these gents are all lawyers… If one's willing to swear out an affidavit and the other isn't, it suggests a certain confidence in one and not the other…

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

Peggy Wente in today's Globe suggests that the Liberals are like Miss Havisham. If I recall my Dickens correctly, Miss Havisham spent her life living in the past.

Chretien and Broadbent (and Joe Clark) represent the past, not the future. Even Ignatieff is a throwback to the days of the philosopher king (what was his name?) who took over the party from Pearson. Why some Liberals think that Bob Rae, another oldie but goodie, is the saviour for their future is hard to fathom.

Dee

The ancient and hopeless Margaret Wente accusing other people of living in the past. That's funny!

Anon

Do people forget that when the Reformers and the PCs merged, it was more of a case of the Reformers swallowing up a mostly extinct party? The PCs were at their mercy, and that helped things along.

Not so with the NDP, which is still going relatively strong. And with two stubborn, polarized partners warring against each other, this is one marriage that would never work.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

More significant even than that: the Reformers were a split off from the PCs and then they came home a decade later, like a teenage kid running away from home because "mom and dad just don't understand". And if you look at the Conservatives today, you will see that they are much much much more Mulroney Progressive Conservatives than they are Manning Reformers or even Stephen Harper Conservatives pre-2006.

By contrast, the NDP and the Liberals have never been part of the same party. While the NDP has slowly slowly been moving to the centre over the decades and so they are, in some ways, closer to each other than they have been, there is no common base. To wit, progressive conservatives (Bryson, Stronach, Keith Martin) will bleed from the right to the Liberals but never to the NDP and vice versa (Emerson, Kahn); and blue progressives (Rae, Dossanjh) will bleed from the left to the Liberals but never to the Conservatives and vice versa (Mulclair).

http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

This is an excellent point. I think the Reform initiative succeeded in locking down the far and religious right, and the Conservatives can count on those votes for as long as they can recycle Reform rhetoric.

Meanwhile as the NDP moves into traditional Liberal terrain, they leave some ground on the left for the Greens.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

My only message to anyone considering the Greens is that they may want to investigate what the party stands for other than a general sense that enviromental issues are important. Does anyone know the Green position on Afghanistan for example?

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Check out their website

Lord Kitchener's Own

Would not a serious push towards electoral reform of the proportional representation kind (if it actually resulted in reform being enacted) result in some of the beneficial effects of a merger (vis a vis getting rid of the Tory government) without having to merge? I mean, even when they're polling really badly, the combined Lib-NDP-Green support is usually about 15-20 points higher than the Tories.

The problem usually with getting politicians behind PR is that they all think that someday they'll get that majority under FPTP and be able to tell everyone else to go fly a kite. However, presumably if they were really talking about a merger, that would be an indication that neither party sees a FPTP majority in their near future. Of course, no one who has any power in either party in 2010 is talking about ANYTHING LIKE A MERGER, except to vigorously deny that it's even a serious topic of discussion, so there's that.
Joan Tintor

If the youngest person in your merger talks is Roy Romanow . . . you may be Living in the Past.

If Warren Kinsella is still embarrassing your leader . . . you may be Living in the Past.

If Bob Rae is your best hope . . . you may be Living in the Past.

Dee

Yeah, because Stephen Harper, John Baird, Jim Flaherty, etc. etc. are so gosh-darn fresh and new as politicians, and certainly weren't involved in politics back in the 90s…
Lord Kitchener's Own

Of course, the point being that the only people talking about this are people from the past. The 2010 folks are not actually talking about this (which is to say that no one who has even a scintilla of actual power or responsibility such that they could make a merger happen is talking about doing it, and everyone who DOES have any of said power – ie the people who are actual leaders in the parties TODAY – is denying any discussions whatsoever, to anyone who'll listen).

I take reports that Jean Chretien, Ed Broadbent and Warren Kinsella might possibly be talking about merging the Liberals and the NDP about the same way as I'd take reports that Brian Mulroney, Jim Harris, and Slash are talking about possibly merging the federal Tories with the Green Party and Guns and Roses (despite constant denials from Stephen Harper, Elizabeth May, Axl Rose, and ANYONE OFFICIALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THEM TODAY, that such a thing should even be a serious topic of discussion).

Dee

Yep LK'sO, that sums it up nicely. I put this entire sordid, goofy outburst down to sour grapes from Kinsella and Mraz. Too bad Wendy Mesley and CBC took the bait on this ridiculous story…

bergkamp

It sounds like conversations are taking place but we don't know how serious they are. So what if Chretien and Broadbent are talking if Iggy, Layton and their respective bases are not interested in a merger.

The Liberals who are interested in a coalition are being remarkably short-sighted and only looking at today's polls. I am delighted that Libs are languishing below 30% in support but I don't believe it will stay there forever – ebbs and flows, Liberals, ebbs and flows.

NDP would be insane to sign up for coalition and/or merger now because Libs only care about winning elections and dippers would quickly become roadkill if/when coalition takes power.
http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

Ok, this is actually funny.

So who is Dylan, the rich sensitive rebel without a cause.
http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

Gilles Duceppe, obviously.
http://intensedebate.com/people/VinceClortho VinceClortho

So Helena Guergis is Valerie Malone? the pretty girl outsider who always gets into trouble.
http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Mike T………. Quit with the name calling. If you can't argue your case intelligently its time to move on and find another outlet for your insults. You keep this up commentators will report your comments and eventually MacLeans will ban you from commenting. Is this what you want?