|
|---|
Showing posts with label Ignatieff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ignatieff. Show all posts
Saturday, 14 May 2011
If Michael Ignatieff had not allowed himself to be spooked by Harper's fearmongering in early 2008, we would have had a chance to implement the Coalition Agreement between the NDP and the Liberal Party, and for the next 18 months a progressive government would have initiated the stimulus program (without wasting as much taxpayer's money as the Tory trinket scheme did), and with a good shot at a further extension of 18 months by agreement of the parties.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Wednesday, 30 March 2011
Hard on the heels of Jack Layton's call on NDP and Liberal supporters to ensure a change of government – by voting out Conservative candidates one Tory at a time – the NDP candidate Ryan Dolby has stepped out of the race for Eglin-Middlesex-London to ensure that a progressive candidate wins:
Ryan Dolby says he will support Liberal candidate Graham Warwick, in his effort to unseat Conservative Joe Preston.Dolby told radio station AM980 he didn't want to split the vote.He also ran for the NDP in 2008, finishing third with 9,135 votes. Preston was re-elected with 22,970 votes, while Liberal Suzanne Van Bommel was second with 11,169.Warwick said he was surprised by the news and declined immediate comment.Dolby says he did not discuss his decision with federal New Democrat officials.“I think it's the best decision on behalf of my family, my community, and my country to do whatever I can to make sure there isn't a Conservative victory, especially in this riding,” he said.“I want to make sure we get a progressive MP — one that cares about improvements to Canada Pension Plan, improvements to employment insurance, believes in democracy instead of contempt, and believes in sustainable job creation instead of building more prisons.”
Hat tip to Far and Wide.
The Cat salutes the first hero of the 2011 election campaign to do something strategic to make sure we have a progressive-centre government instead of the Harper neocon one!
Way to go, Ryan!
Millions of Canadians are today breathing a sigh of relief to see you and Jack starting the breaking of the logjam.
Now let's see some more NDP candidates and some Liberal candidates do the math and Do A Ryan to stop Harper!
Saturday, 26 March 2011
... and Duceppe says Harper is lying about his desire to form a coalition in 2004.
Today on Parliament hill, a fiery Michael Ignatieff decided to call a spade a spade, and branded Stephen Harper a liar. Harper, the prime minister of the disgraced Conservative government which was found by the House to be guilty of contempt of Parliament (the first time ever that a government has been found in contempt in the history of Westminster-style democracies), has been distorting facts in order to confuse voters.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Friday, 25 March 2011
Blue Door, Red Door: The Statement Ignatieff should make on Coalitions
0 comments Posted by 2011 at 20:01
As The Cat forecast, Harper has started the 2011 election cycle with a bang, leading with his best suit: Ignatieff will form a coalition with the godless socialists and treacherous separatists rather than let me rule as a minority government again. And, just as The Cat forecast (here, here, and here), Ignatieff is being hammered by the media over the issue as shaped by Harper, and is coming off second best so far.
Score 1 for Harper & Zero for Liberals:
Note what is happening: Harper framed the issue of coalitions in a way to suit his party; the media unthinkingly picked up the framing, did not do their homework, and have been repeating it at media scrums with Ignatieff; and Ignatieff's answer is being treated by the media as a non-answer or as incomplete.
Tuesday, 22 March 2011
 |
| Harper's Opportunity Cost Choice |
The Harper government has just had its butt kicked by all three other parties over its budget, and Ignatieff is off to the races with a crisp, clean, vibrant start.
Ignatieff rejected the Harper March 22 budget out of hand and in the process framed some of the issues in a tight, powerful way:
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE“We find that the priorities of this government are not the priorities of ordinary Canadians,” Ignatieff told reporters. “This is a government that proposes to spend a thousand times more on prisons than on youth crime prevention, a thousand times more on jets than on helping kids get a
Saturday, 19 March 2011
We seldom see a drop in support as large as the one detailed below. Usually support from voters tails away over time, and you have to go back six to 12 months to notice a significant drop in support.
But to lose 20% support in one of THE most critical segments of voters IN ONE MONTH is more like a collapse, or implosion, than an erosion.
The reason for the change? Disgust with Harper and his Conservative Party. Seniors
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Tuesday, 8 March 2011
Lawrence Martin in Tuesday's Globe & Mail has this to say about Harper and his party:
The government’s arc of duplicity is remarkable to behold. And there are more revelations to come.
And Martin summarizes it this way:
During the Chrétien government years, I reported extensively on malfeasance by the Liberals. To do the math on the Harper government is to conclude that, while it has no sponsorship scandal on its books, it’s already surpassed its predecessor on a range of other abuse-of-power indices.
Martin's article is a must read for all those interested in just how many cases of duplicity Harper and his party are guilty of. The roster is full; and they all point to a systematic pattern of disrespect of Parliament, disrespect of Canadian's political rights, contempt for Parliamentary traditions and conventions, willingness to bend the
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Monday, 7 March 2011
The rumours of a possible snap election once the Speaker announces his decision on a possible contempt issue are welcome.
In my view, Ignatieff should call a snap confidence motion if and as soon as the Speaker announces a decision that finds the Harper government in contempt.
Given their past statements, all three opposition parties should find that they support the no confidence motion.
And this would mean an election based on the Harper Tories diminution of our democratic rights, and contempt for the rights of our MPs.Fighting an election on these grounds will give the opposition parties the chance to frame the issues as the protection of the Canadian democracy, and to use the many incidents where Harper has dismissed established precedent, and misused the assets of the Canadian government to support political party purposes.
These are good issues for an election, and tough ones for the Tories to respond to, because the facts of their disregard for our political rights are there for all to see.
Go for it, Michael.
Take him down.
Now.
Monday, 28 February 2011
In an earlier post I referred to a recent poll which showed that more than two-thirds of Liberals and members of the NDP supported a coalition government made up of these two parties.
Instead of listening to this feedback from their members, both Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff seem determined to continue with business as usual (a course which will most likely result in yet another minority Harper government, with a mandate to continue his right wing rule for another 5 years).
In Egypt, and in several countries across northern Africa and the Middle East, ordinary citizens are rising up to protest against leaders who are not listening to them, and who are not implementing reforms – including political reforms.LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Monday, 21 February 2011
 |
| Decision time for the leaders |
The latest Nanos poll confirms other recent polls and show the Tories clawing back support in the Prairies and west, with slight gains for the NDP. When 308 applied the Nanos poll to its projections, it ended up with a minority Tory government (increased to 147 seats from the current 143), with the three opposition parties still holding the majority of the seats in Parliament.
What this means is that if an election is triggered during a vote of no-confidence of the March Harper budget, the Governor General after the election with these results would call on Harper to try yet again to gain confidence with another budget, and if this did not happen because the three opposition parties held firm to their decision to oust the Tories and replace them, the GG would refuse a Harper request to either prorogue Parliament or to call another election so soon after one was held.
Instead, the GG would call upon Michael Ignatieff to attempt to form a government – as leader of the party with the next highest number of seats – which could gain the confidence of the House. If the NDP and Bloc vote confidence in the new minority Liberal government, the Tories would be unable to block this vote with their minority of seats, and Ignatieff would then form a new government.
The key to this change of government happening lies in all 3 opposition parties voting against the Harper March budget and the one after the ensuing election. If any one supports Harper, he continues as prime minister.
It is important to note that 380 forecasts 28 seats for the NDP, a loss of 6 seats from their current 34.
The tradeoff Jack Layton has to make is that between principle (should he support Harper's new budget -with the Tories determined to continue with a $6 billion corporate tax reduction but prepared to partially support one or two of Layton's table wish lists - or should he be consistent with his and his party's past statements and require the $6 billion to be re-directed to other uses (no cash for corporations but cash for kids, for example).
Layton also has to consider that he will lose 6 seats.
The gains for Layton are substantial and consist of retention of his political integrity, consistency of principle, the retention of his leadership of the NDP (which will be badly threatened if he caves to Harper as Harper's cheap date for 2011 budget prom), and the ability of the NDP to play a major role in the programs to be implemented by a more progressive Liberal minority government over the next 4 years.
Boiled down to the nitty gritty, does keeping jobs for 6 NDP MPs weigh more than replacing the reactionary Harper government and boosting jobs for hundreds of thousands of Canadians over the next 4 years?
This is a decision Jack Layton will be making in the next few days.
Statesman or vote-for-hire hack.
Thursday, 17 February 2011
Michael Ignatieff is out of step with Liberal voters on coalition
0 comments Posted by 2011 at 16:06
Now that Gilles Duceppe has initiated a belated public dialogue on the very real prospects of a coalition government after the next election – a Liberal-NDP government – let's look at the latest poll by EKOS on the subject (January 27 2011).
That poll clearly shows that Ignatieff's is turning his back on two-thirds of Liberal voters
when it comes to a coalition government:
How can a leader claim to be leading on such a vital issue when the huge majority of potential Liberal voters would prefer an outcome which is the direct opposite of the one he has said he prefers?
Perhaps it is time for Ignatieff and his advisors to speak to members of the Liberal Party?
 |
| Gilles Duceppe |
... for openly discussing the realities of Canadian politics:
As reported in Quebec’s French-language daily La Presse, the Bloc Quebecois has returned speculation about a future anti-Conservative coalition to the forefront of political discussion. The party has declared that it retains the right to support a coalition of parties in the event of another minority government. While no parties were named, based on current polling trends, that could only mean supporting the Liberals and the NDP to block the Conservatives from forming another government.
And the initial Liberal response is yet another pathetic bout of whistling past the graveyard:
On the other front, by musing openly about supporting a coalition with the Liberals, Duceppe has put the Liberals back on the defensive, with Montreal MP Marc Garneau quickly denying that the Liberals have any plan to form a coalition with another party.
What the Liberal party should have said in answer to the Bloc move to recognize reality, was to welcome Duceppe's statement, and state that the Liberal Party was prepared to form the next government of Canada should a Tory minority government lose a vote of confidence.
However, to the extent the Liberals would need support from other MPs in the House, such support would be welcomed provided that the Liberals were not prepared to take any steps to endanger the unity of Canada, nor to embark upon irresponsible economic steps which would hurt Canadians rather than help them.
And Michael Ignatieff could spell out a set of general principles which would govern a minority Liberal government (keep it short, keep it simple, keep it effective).
And we could then all sit back and watch the new Tories scramble around like headless chickens.
Tuesday, 15 February 2011
The latest Ipsos Reid poll shows the Harper new Tories increasing their lead over the Liberals, with volatility in Ontario making the difference.
In the industrial heartland of Canada the Tories received 42% from those polled.
But this is the key message that Michael Ignatieff should be thinking very, very hard about:
According to the latest Ipsos Reid poll, the Tories stand at 42% in Ontario (up six points), compared to 32% for the Liberals (down eight points), 15% for the NDP (unchanged), and 11% for the Green party (up three points).
Put down your quill pen, Michael, and turn to your abacus and do the math.
Ponder on this: 58% of Ontario voters prefer some party or parties other than Stephen Harper's right wing Conservative Party.
Now do the right thing.
Saturday, 29 January 2011
 |
| Thirty shekels in a bag for Jack Layton |
The Cat is perturbed by Ignatieff's apparent lack of knowledge of the importance in politics of the need to frame issues so as to secure the approval of voters.
Despite the obvious lessons of our giant neighbour, where framing has been very significant in winning elections, it seems that the current Liberal advisors to the leader, and our leader himself, are content to coast along in blissful ignorance of modern politicking.
Despite the obvious lessons of our giant neighbour, where framing has been very significant in winning elections, it seems that the current Liberal advisors to the leader, and our leader himself, are content to coast along in blissful ignorance of modern politicking.
That said, I compliment Ignatieff on one very successful framing – his short, punchy, effective and issue-defining characterization of Liberal Party policy on university and college education funding for our students.
He has put it this way in several speeches:
You get the grades, and you get to go.
Good stuff, Michael!
The Cat has one suggestion for the coming battle over whether the Tory budget in March should favour tax cuts over other uses of those funds.
At an open house of Ignatieff which I attended, a young student asked Michael how he could explain just where he would get the funds to pay for the various programs he said a Liberal government would carry out, given the huge deficits we are now running, and the debt load our country faces.
Ignatieff fumbled – surprisingly, because this is an obvious question which he will need to address during an election campaign if he wishes to be a credible alternative to Harper – for an answer, and seemed to stumble onto one when a thought struck him: we as a Liberal government would use the funds now flowing in from the taxes on corporations which Harper wants to reduce through his "tax cuts".
The NDP will soon face a critical decision. Just how much in the way of bribes in Harper's March budget for NDP favoured special interests will Jack Layton and his team accept for them to agree to the federal government giving corporations $6 billion through the proposed Tory "tax cut"?
Will thirty shekels in a brown envelope be enough for Jack to prop up Harper's government?
The Tories have framed the "tax cuts" in two ways, and so far the Liberals, Bloc and NDP have failed to come up with a competing and more successful framing of this issue.
Harper's boys are calling their proposal a "tax cut". This is pure Republican framing: nobody in their right minds – so the repug theory goes – can oppose a tax cut, because everybody knows that taxes are bad things – money is taken from citizens and wasted by the central government. This framing still works in the US because the Democrats there have still ignored the lessons on this issue suggested by Lakoff. Liberals and NDP MPs are falling into the elephant trap Lakoff identified so clearly by using these same words.
The second framing now being used by the Harperites is simple and effective, as well. They now talk about the Liberals being opposed to "job creators" (being the corporations), and therefore being against reducing unemployment.
There we have it: Tory framing of "tax cuts" (good to do, bad to oppose) and "job creators" (good to support, bad to oppose, as Ignatieff is doing).
And Ignatieff is fumbling for a crisp, clear response on the issue which just might become the second major issue of the election if the government budget is voted down in March.
But fear not, Michael! The Cat is padding to your rescue.
All you need to do to win the framing battle on corporate taxes, is to frame the issue this way:
"We have a simple choice: cash for corporations, or cash for kids."
And back up the cash for kids by outlining in broad terms exactly how the $6 billion now paid in taxes by corporations will be used by a Liberal government to fund programs for kids.
And keep it restricted to kids – don't muddy the waters by talking about "middle class" or debt reduction or other issues when you talk about this plank. Keep it tight, keep it focused on the kids, keep it concrete, and above all avoid talking about tax cuts.
Got that, Michael?
We have a simple choice: cash for corporations, or cash for kids.
The Cat will accept payment of a due consideration in the form of cans of cat food. In a brown envelope. In a hotel room.
Oh, and in Canada, of course. For tax reasons ...
Monday, 24 January 2011
 | |
| Pavlov and his barking dog |
Those who think the Harper attack ads are (1) simply a repeat of the past and therefore boring and ineffective, (2) muddled and a bit confusing, and therefore ineffective, (3) vicious and unprincipled but their viciousness has made them ineffective, or (4) a little bit of all of these points, and therefore ineffective, are just plain wrong.
Harper's ads are brilliantly conceived, tightly focused, and are proving very effective in forcing Ignatieff to fight on ground Harper has chosen, and to enter that fight with one hand tied behind his back.
The Tory ads are highly effective in framing the issues, and Ignatieff's response is proof of this: he is ignoring all the lessons of political framing and falling – yet again – into the trap set by Stephen Harper.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Friday, 14 January 2011
I believe he has, but only if Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton stop dead in their tracks and consider the political implications of the latest statement by Harper on party financing, and the opportunity this has created for the replacement of a Harper minority government after the next election by a progressive-centre one.
This is Harper's latest statement on public financing of parties, from the Calgary Herald:
But on Wednesday, Harper said he still believes the system should be abolished. "I think we've been pretty clear that we don't think there's really strong justification for this direct subsidy to parties." ... Harper said it's clear that he couldn't accomplish this in the current Parliament because the opposition parties would block him."It will be a clear plank in our platform. But as I say, voters shouldn't hold out any hope that we're going to get any support to do this from the other parties."
Why is Harper doing this? The key to the replacement of the Harper right wing
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Monday, 27 December 2010
The False Choice: Voters should choose only the Liberals or the Tories
0 comments Posted by 2011 at 17:21
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says that if an election is called in the coming months, his party is the only true alternative to the Conservatives.
In an interview with CTV's Question Period, Ignatieff says that a vote for Jack Layton's NDP or Gilles Duceppes' Bloc Quebecois is essentially a vote for another Conservative government.
"What I'm saying is, it's time for Canadians to make a choice between two governing parties," Ignatieff said.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
 |
| Chantal Hebert |
Mutually assured destruction (M.A.D.) is a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy in which a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two opposing sides would effectively result in the destruction of both the attacker and the defender, becoming thus a war that has no victory nor any armistice but only total destruction.
We can ask whether Jack Layton and Michael are also 'mad' and wedded to such a MAD strategy.
Chantal Herbert thinks so, and The Cat shares her view:
If NDP and Liberal leaders Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff had taken the advice of their elder statesmen and looked for a way to pool forces earlier this year, the result of their joint efforts would likely be doing better in the polls than their separate parties.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Friday, 10 December 2010
The coalition government in Britain is proceeding with legislation to dramatically change the House of Lords. Out go some 800 doddering nobles; in come 300 Lords.
But the real change is that the 300 new lords will be elected by a system of proportional representation:
Crucially, elections to a new senate would take place using proportional representation, the electoral system long favoured by the Lib Dems.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Thursday, 9 December 2010
Stephen Harper can sing! Somebody get Jean Chretien on the line ...
0 comments Posted by 2011 at 15:08Congratulations to Harper for his handful of good songs at the Tory xmas party! Nice to see a Canadian prime minister get up on a stage and belt out a few songs – and able to hold a tune while swatting the keyboards.
Perhaps we should get Chretien to join him in a new Canadian band – The FormerPims (for Former PMs). Jean can slide a bit and add some lilting liberal blues to Harper's conservative accompaniment.
LIKE IT? CLICK HERE TO READ MORE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
