Trudeau is the latest to openly muse about what may be required to defeat these Conservatives in the next election. His sentiment really no different that what we are hearing from certain quarters in the NDP, there are forces in both parties open to some level of co-operation, degree yet to be entirely fleshed out. Watching how the MP's from both parties GENERALLY interact- partisan constructs aside- there is a fairly positive mood, which is cultivated primarily by a sense of common "enemy". Liberals, NDP, Green, doesn't matter, we are all concerned about the government changing the environmental review process for instance, from my perspective the dangerous dimensions of application trump any tribal concern. In other words, this government is so offensive, on so many issues, as well as the toxic climate they cultivate, they will galvanize opposition. I firmly believe a Harper majority, their unbridled power, is beginning to act like a cold shower, it is putting the true damage into undeniable focus, which will allow for decisions beyond narrow self interest and arbitrary lines that pale in comparison.
Differences will always remain, fundamental philosophical departures, but surely a party with a "frontrunner" who sounds like a Liberal, and another with a former NDP leader at the helm, aren't that far apart that no rapprochement can be had. When faced with the reality of what another Harper mandate might mean for the country we desire, big picture epiphany will be reached, it is happening one member at a time, as we continually see the consequences of this particular reign.
I'm not sure what manifestation of co-operation will unfold, but I will remain open to ever proposal, because while there are fundamental disagreements, there is also a common realization of what the alternative means. There is a way to rid ourselves of Harper in 2015, there is reasonable path, but it will require brave thinking that puts common interest above self interest.
20 comments:
There is a big difference between now and the pre-2004 situation. Before the CA and PCs merged - the Liberals had won three big majority governments in a row and it looked like the Paul Martin "juggernaut" was going to win 250-plus seats in fall 2003. The "right" didn't just unite to stop Paul Martin. They united to save themselves from annhilation. In contrast, the Harper Tories are wayy more vulnerable and would lose their majority with just a 1% swing against them in 2015. I cannot speak for the Liberals, but for the NDP there are enough grounds for optimism about 2015 - that why bother with a pre-election scheme with the Liberals? Some polls (i.e. Ekos) have the NDP on its won within the margin or error of the Tories...and that's without a leader!
Yep, those same polls that show the Libs ANYTHING but dead. LOL. You'll never figure it out.
I'm not saying the Liberals are dead...I'm saying that there is enough reason for hope for both the Liberals and the NDP and the Tories are close enough to losing a majority in 2015 - that there is no great urgency for the opposition parties to "unite"
Oh, I can see a minority, but I'm really hard pressed to see defeat in 2015.
What do you think happens if in election 2015 the Tories get 150 seats, NDP gets 120, Liberals get 70 and the BQ is wiped out again?
I assume that Harper would lose on a Throne speech vote and the GG would invite the NDP leader to form a government either in coalition with the Liberals or with their tacit support. no?
I put that scenario under the "anything can happen" camp. Your party is currently third in Ont, we aren't going anywhere. Don't see the growth and I doubt you can hang onto all your QC seats. What the polls say right now, we'll get seats back, you'll lose a few, which plays to Harper's advantage in a minority. I do agree, in the scenario you present, we could form a coalition, but again, I really can't see it.
Maybe it's because I've voted NDP, Green in the past, that I'm not so hell bent on these party distinctions. I suspect most non partisans can see this as well, which means some brave people may have to talk over the tribalism. The open primary idea with the Libs may be where we see the first manifestation. We'll see.
The Liberal "open primaries" won't be much fun if the only name on the ballot is Bob Rae.
That looks likely:
http://www.ipolitics.ca/2012/03/15/former-ottawa-orleans-candidate-tests-liberal-leadership-bid-sonya-bell/
If my 2015 scenario happens - either Bob Rae agrees to back an NDP minority government - or else he can be the Nick Clegg of Canada. Choose your poison.
If my 2015 scenario happens - either Bob Rae agrees to back an NDP minority government - or else he can be the Nick Clegg of Canada. Choose your poison.
I can't see the Conservatives ever wanting the Liberal's help. You could chalk things up to it just being politics, but I can't help but feel that some of the Conservative attacks in the House of Commons comes from something... personal at times.
As for not needing the Liberal's help... Edmonton-Strathcona. Liberals rallied for her helping Linda Duncan win -- first time for an NDP MP to win a second term. (Also an interesting story here on the NDP not reciprocating with the Liberals and the Greens.)
To be honest, the NDP might maintain their numbers. I expect a bump in them too after the leadership convention (same thing happened to the Liberals back in 2006). (Actually, you'd think they'd be a bit higher than they are, but then back in 2006, the NDP didn't break over 20%, so the fact that the Liberals are doing a bit stronger is a negative pull on the NDP.)
Hey, you know, crazy things can happen in the next couple of years. Who could have predicted the NDP taking official opposition in 2011. I just hope in 2015 we're not faced with another Conservative majority government.
Well, if you look at the right turn Harper has taken with this majority, he doesn't look too worried.
Ed already worries the NDP will become the Liberals anyway:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/broadbent-blasts-mulcair-warns-against-pushing-ndp-toward-centre/article2370305/
Which is odd given Broadbent favoured a merger, which by its very nature would lead to a Mulcair anyways.
Well, if you look at the right turn Harper has taken with this majority, he doesn't look too worried.
Not with a divided opposition. And if Harper keeps on this path it's going to be hard for any of the parties not to speak of some sort of co-operation.
(If not merger, why not co-operation between parties -- the sort that put Linda Duncan and Elizabeth May over their Conservative rivals?)
Ed already worries the NDP will become the Liberals anyway:
Read something about the moderating effects on parties when there are just two political parties in your system. Moderates tend to flood into the parties drowning out the extremists. (Well, it used to work in the past, sort of broke down in America the last couple of decades (apparently). Part of this may be because moderates are abandoning the Republican party.) If the NDP is looking to replace the Liberals, they'll obviously moderate. What did they think would happen?
Agree, the path to power will forever be a compromise on hard left ideals, it's just how they get there. Doer was center, center right, Calvert was centerist and Dexter abandoning the left and reinvented the party. That's the problem with teams, it clouds things, they hate McGuinty and he's as left as any NDP Premier we've seen. Never get it.
Democratic Liberal Party using Peace rooms instead of war rooms,best practice government via Truth and Reconciliation domestic and international crime policies aimed at ending slavery as well as all extortionary forms of indentured servitude around the world by ending usuary.
The streets will be clamouring against Harper day after day year after year growing louder and more insistent. Voters know how to do this, let the parties position themselves where they will, it's liberal democratic green voter conventions we need, and that would get a big boost if the parties supported local conventions so we can launch NDP, Green, Liberals and other voter conferences to work on common policy over the next three years.
I would like very much to believe that there are senior and high ranking members of both the NDP and LPC who are more concerned about the future of Canada than they are about the futures of their respective partisan obsessions.
I don't. At least not yet.
I first started typing about the need for either co-operation or a merger in about 2008. The level of vituperation I received from NDP and LPC supporters was exceeded only by that I received from the recta of the right.
It certainly made me doubt the sincerity of the LPC or NDP when it came to sending Harper into the history books. I wondered if maybe having Harper around was better for fund raising or new member acquisition. At the very least I questioned whether the ordinary membership of either party (or any party for that matter) was capable of anything resembling thought that wasn't purely reactive.
I'm not at all sure that enough has yet changed to awaken the caved troglodytes among the executive levels of the compulsively partisan unisex old boys clubs in charge of these 19th century throwbacks.
When it comes right down to it I don't believe they have the psychological mechanisms to recognize or acknowledge that there is a distinction to be made between their personal preferences and desires and the needs of Canadian citizens and the country as a whole.
Just like the Conservatives really.
We desperately need a new breed of politician that isn't utterly dependent on or beholden to our archaic political models and orthodoxies.
Likely?
Nope. The existing power structures would be so frightened of someone like that they would instantly destroy them. With the enthusiastic participation of the press who wouldn't be able to countenance the notion of having to think beyond the boundaries of their self defined little ticky tacky boxes.
I'm not optimistic.
I wish I was but I'm not, not even a little bit.
Post a Comment