The NDP stands on shaky ground, moreso than at any time during Layton's reign. The polls consistently show erosion, to the point of relative oblivion. The environment, once an NDP policy strength, is no longer their talking point, as evidenced by the Green Party ascension and the Liberals new found urgency. The NDP is clearly feeling the squeeze and Layton may be desperate. Couple these facts with Harper's own desperation in needing to neutralize the environment as an issue heading into the next election, and you have a dangerous concoction.
It is now a political imperative for Layton and Harper to come together and forward a revised Clean Air Act. Both men need the legislation for there own survival. I worry that the political animal in Layton will make fundamental sacrifices that produce a bad bill. Harper will have to make concessions, but the final product could fall well short of what is needed. You then have a situation where any legitimate criticisms are tempered by the two-headed propaganda machine and Canadians are left confused. Layton needs to show relevance and trumpet the "making parliament work" angle, while Harper just needs a draw on his weakest file. In other words, Harper doesn't want the environment to be an issue, and Layton wants to say he fixed a bad bill.
Political consideration finds its way into every corner of parliament. However, we now have a situation were political expediency may be the only motivation, which makes it hard to envision a clean thought process. Layton may rightfully see this Act as his only chance to retain offical party status. Desperate men often make bad decisions, which leads me to believe that a confusing sellout is on the horizon.
UPDATE Another poll today, confirming Layton's predicament.
Robert McClelland at My Blahg isn't impressed.
29 comments:
You haven't heard the NDP plan of attack? They are trying to smear Elizabeth May as a Right winger. Talking about scraping the bottom of the barrel. Yet they have no problem with the CPC. Go figure.
F&W,
I totally agree that the NDP is now quite "motivated" to pay more than lip service to a new and saleable environment bill.
In addition, the CPC is also much more "motivated", the public's apparent interest (the media's take on the public interest?) means that building a bill that takes this issue off the table for any election if an attractive idea.
I envision something good for Canada coming out of this. A piece of Environment Legislation that would pass the house and a pry bar that the LPC doesn't have when attacking the CPC government.
However, in the longterm, the NDP, unless it can neutralize erosion from both the Greens and the LPC, is likely doomed.
It is important to remember that they are losing their grip on union support, for several reasons, meaning that they have no longterm viability if they cannot capture volunteers and electorate support fully on their own.
cheers,
Tomm
I doubt attacking May will bear much fruit, especially with her high-road approach.
Tomm, I hope you are right about a good piece of legislation, I actually argued this point earlier. My problem now, will Layton walk away if the Tories don't move enough, or will he accept half-measures, covered by a few concessions. Enough to save face, but not enough to be substantial?
Steve V,
That's a good question, and I don't know where the breaking point is between the CPC and the NDP.
I am hoping that they do what they must to build a good road map so that Canada becomes a leader on this issue.
The CPC have accomplished a lot this year, although I'm a fan, however for non-fans, a great accomplishment of this government might be a good road map, so good, that the LPC and Bloq also ultimately support.
If the legislation could be so strong that we can show "relative" unity in its passage, that would be a legacy of this Parliament for all Canadians and not just those for soft CPC supporters.
Tomm
May and Dion would make mincemeat out of him if he did that Steve.
He'd have to walk away and claim at least he tried, while the other parties did nothing...which of course won't be true.
Even if they do get something good, I can't see this panning out for Harper. It simply makes it more clear that the current government has no ability to deal with the environment, if left to their own devices.
While it may take it off the table where an election is concerned, I don't imagine it will go away completely.
I hope Layton does use whatever influence he has to move forward on the environment. For years, the Liberals had the votes and the seats and did essentially nothing while GHG emissions soared: if the current political circumstances permit Layton to push Harper, he should do so, just like he pushed the desperate Paul Martin on the budget back in 2005.
Remember that? When Ralph Goodale complained that he'd rather have stayed with his initial budget plans (the ones that pleased Stephen Harper so much he said he'd support the government), but was forced by Layton to move in a more progressive direction?
I have no doubt that if Layton forces Harper in the proper direction on the environment that Stephane Dion will say that there's been a deal with the devil, just like Harper did back in 2005, when Layton nudged the right-wing Liberals in the left direction.
Of course, when he does so, he will sound foolish and hypocritical, just like he does when he tries to pretend that the mission in Afghanistan is some kind of 'far-right' creation of the 'neoconservative' Stephen Harper, even though Bill Graham is on record as saying it's a Liberal mission through and through.
While no legislation is perfect (the NDP budget of 2005 wasn't perfect either), Layton certainly shouldn't lock Canada into a bad bill on climate change. At the same time, he should use whatever influence he has to move things in a positive direction, and let the Liberals hypocritically cry foul all they want: given their record, they're in no position to be criticizing anyone else on climate change or cooperation with the 'evil' Stephen Harper.
"He'd have to walk away and claim at least he tried, while the other parties did nothing...which of course won't be true."
That's a possibility, but then you have the issue front and center in the campaign, which makes Layton an afterthought in mind (even though the NDP has been progressive on the issue for years).
Dippers were 'genuine' in their vote against extending the Afghan mission 2 years.
In contrast, many Liberals who said they agreed with the extension voted against it because they didn't like the way it was done.
Dippers were 'genuine' in their vote against re-opening the SSM debate.
In contrast, many Liberals who said they had voted against the SSM bill originally, decided to vote, not on conscience, but because they didn't like the way it was done.
Dippers were 'genuine' in their supporting the Accountability Act, and have been given MUCH credit for getting it into law.
In contrast, Liberals opposed much of it, not because they thought it was not good legislation, but because Liberals didn't like how it messed up their leadership race.
Green party Lizzy May is doing the same thing as the Liberals. She is bad mouthing the NDP for sending the Clean Air Act to committee because she was angry that the Conservatives got a chance at doing something for the environment.
I question how 'genuine' May is on the environment, seems to me that she is Liberal lite and is as power hungry as the Liberals.
I think people will vote for the 'genuine' parties. Conservatives and NDP.
I question how 'genuine' May is on the environment
Now that is laugh out loud funny! I do hope many more conservatives use that line if there is an election.
May, btw, is far from liberal lite, she is quite 'right' actually, outside of the environment.
Steve,
The longterm prospects for the NDP are grim. There are just too many parties chasing too few votes, and the NDP is guy most likely to lose the electorate's interest.
The LPC has a tradition of winning & a bright spanking new image, the Green's are fresh, the NDP has become the "party of wimpy peaceniks", and not much else.
I really don't see a solution, unless it is something that discredits the Green's or the LPC. The NDP has to start digging for mud and start slinging it.
I've got one, are the Green's still for "deep ecology"?
cheers,
Tomm
I think Mr. Layton has snookered himself, though I'm not entirely convinced if he's aware of it.
That's not to suggest he isn't bright. It's more an observation of how his ego seems to have over-taken his decision making ability.
Sierra Club and NDP see the committee working on the Clean Air Act as an 'opportunity'. May sees it as giving PMSH as chance at staying in power.
Which opinion is the 'genuine' one for the environment, Sierra Club and NDP or May.?
CBC Dec 14/06
...Much will depend on the new Commons committee set up to revamp the Clean Air Act, which met for the first time Wednesday. ...
"It's been universally accepted that their Clean Air Act is completely inadequate and this (is) an opportunity to make it strong environment legislation," said Emilie Moorhouse of the Sierra Club.
Nathan Cullen: "What the Liberals would like to do is just keep repeating the word Kyoto until everyone falls asleep," he said. "The bill is wide open, that's the advantage of this. There is no limit to what we want to do on this bill."
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/science/061214/g121408A.html
wilson, your cbc address does not work.
Most people use polls as a momentary diversion or for adolescent bragging, not as the basis to concoct elaborate fantasies.
robert
Are you suggesting this post is "fantasy"?
Yes. The environment is too important to the NDP, its supports and especially Layton to sell out on it. And most of your post is based on a few recent polls following a spate of all liberal all the time news; aka a convention bounce.
robert
I think it fair to assume that NDP strategists are quite concerned about the recent polling, the rise of the Greens, the fifth place finish in London and Dion as Liberal leader. If you grant me this, then it is only natural to assume Layton feels some pressure. Couple this reality with Harper's need to look relevant on the environment and you have the atmosphere for compromise.
It was only a few months ago that Layton was openly musing about replacing the Liberals. What was he basing his optimism on? Polling perhaps.
I agree, that the environment is very important to the NDP, and that is precisely why I voted for them last election. The problem, the other parties have adopted similar progressive outlooks, which has the potential to neutralize the issue. If that is the case, then the NDP loses a major selling point. Layton must have some temptation to work with Harper to hatch a deal. Time will tell, let's see if my thoughts are mere fantasy or predictive :)
Robert, I understand that you support Jack, but it's pretty tough to dispute that he's in some trouble.
Sure the Liberal's are in a honeymoon period, but I've read more than one comment by NDP supporter's who are still ticked at how he initiated the last election. They will not vote for Jack. If I've seen a number of these comments, you have to know there are many more out there.
I don't doubt that the environment is still very important to the NDP and I think for him to sell out would be unthinkable, but he does seem more opportunistic lately, and the altruism that the Party used to project is being eroded by that.
The NDP is more interested in destroying the Liberals and Greens than they are in improving the environment. The sad thing is it will never work, and will only help out the Conservatives.
The negative campaign that they waged in LNC was disgusting, especially from a party who used to be about being positive.
Wilson your comments about May are ridiculous "She is bad mouthing the NDP for sending the Clean Air Act to committee because she was angry that the Conservatives got a chance at doing something for the environment."
1) May didn't bad mouth the NDP in the by-election, but the NDP was full of vile anger towards her. One newspaper article called the NDP's Walker (who ran one of the most negative campaigns I have ever seen) a pitbull, while calling May's the "group hug campaign."
2) May said that if Layton could get Harper to accept our Kyoto targets she would be the first one to shake his hand.
3) The Tories hope that they can keep the clean air act in committee until the next election where they will be able to say that they are working hard on an environmental solution with the support of the NDP! If it does leave committee you can sure that if there are any positive changes in the bill the Tories will manufacture their own downfall with a different issue before it passes into law. Either way they will use Layton's support to their advantage and leave Canadians completely confused as to who stands where on the environment. I blame Layton 100% for this.
4) When Flaherty's economic update clearly showed that under the Conservatives there would not be one cent for the environment (or anything else) during the next dozen or so years the NDP should have immediately pulled any support for the act.
5) The Liberals and Bloc appear to working together for the good of the environment, the NDP appears to be working with Harper because they are only interested in weakening the Liberals, no matter how much it strengthens the Conservatives in the process. Thankfully it appears to back firing on him.
6) In the fall of 2000 when I started supporting the group of Toronto NDPers who were pushing Layton's candidacy for the next NDP leader I had never been so full of hope. He was near hero status for me based on his effectiveness as a city politician and his effectiveness as an environmental activist on the Adams Mine/Toronto garbage that I had been fighting for more than a decade. I had high hopes which is probably why after watching him as leader for the last couple years I can say that I am completely disgusted.
wayward, I am on my feet applauding!
So well said, you broke it down.
Get yourself hired my man, we need you and your vision.
KNB,
Hold your applause. Wayward Son is still Wayward.
Way, that was just babble. Why would the NDP be more interested in destroying the Green's and the Liberal's than the Environment?
I have no intention of voting for them, but I certainly would not call them that craven. They certainly need to bury those two parties but isn't the way to do it to CARE and do something good for the environment?
What makes you think that the Bloq and the LPC are working together for the good of the environment. Neither party is idealogical about the environment, they both use it as a barometer as to how the wind is blowing. The Bloq cares about getting a good deal for Quebec, and embarrassing national parties. The LPC cares about getting re-elected. In neither of those statements does the word "environment" appear. And please don't pretend either party has some environmental savior track record. That would just make me nauseous.
Try again.
Tomm
The problem, the other parties have adopted similar progressive outlooks, which has the potential to neutralize the issue.
Not really. The Libs and Cons can only claim that this time they'll really do something about the environment. The NDP can claim that they've been doing something about the environment all along. Deeds speak louder than words.
but I've read more than one comment by NDP supporter's who are still ticked at how he initiated the last election.
Yikes! You sound like me from two years ago. As I pointed out in my post, all the parties have gone through this silly nonsense recently. For the Cons it was following the `04 election. They were unelectable. Harper would never be PM. I bobbled my head in agreement with every one of these statements. I even pointed out that more than one Con supporter was ticked at how the Cons ran the last election just like you are now with the NDP. I was obviously wrong then--but learned from the experience--just as you're wrong now.
The NDP is more interested in destroying the Liberals and Greens than they are in improving the environment.
So how are things going on the home planet there Space Cadet?
"What makes you think that the Bloq and the LPC are working together for the good of the environment. Neither party is idealogical about the environment, they both use it as a barometer as to how the wind is blowing."
Well this is the way I see it. The Bloc and the Liberals were welcoming the NDP with open arms to stand together and come up with environmental policy. The NDP decided that this was an opportunity to play the hero and screw the Liberals so they decided to help the Conservatives. In the process the NDP has screwed themselves, screwed the environment and screwed the country. And Canadians recognize this - the recent poll on which party Canadians thought was best on the environment had the NDP and Conservatives tied for dead last at less than 15% each, with the Liberals and the Green Party running about 30% each.
"Not really. The Libs and Cons can only claim that this time they'll really do something about the environment. The NDP can claim that they've been doing something about the environment all along. Deeds speak louder than words."
Have you checked out the NDP's provincial records? No better than any other party. How about Saskatchewan's NDP government which has made it pretty clear they want nothing to do with cutting ghg's. The only provinces I have seen that seem to be making any commitment are on the east coast and Quebec, non of which have an NDP government.
I was obviously wrong then--but learned from the experience--just as you're wrong now.
I'm simply stating what I've read, that doesn't make me wrong.
The NDP can claim that they've been doing something about the environment all along. Deeds speak louder than words.
You've been speaking about it all along, but what precisely has your party done? Jack can claim that he continues to focus on the issue and hold the government to account, but if he is unable to persuade on his points, what has he done?
Look, I see a place for the NDP in Parliament, I just think that the party is off message and for what it's worth, I don't think Brad Lavigne is helping matters.
Either Layton doesn't grasp the threat to confederation that Harper personifies or he does recognize it and still thinks he can work with it or he doesn't think Harper's a threat.
One of those three assessments is where Layton's strategy is coming from.
Which one doesn't make him a fool?
dana
I would just add one more, Layton thinks it helps him politically. The question you pose still applies :)
Post a Comment