Page 3 of 7 [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

25 Mar 2011, 4:05 pm

I have no objection whatsoever to a coalition.

The most likely scenario would, I think, be something like David Lewis' commitment to support the second Trudeau government for a determined period of years. This would leave the NDP with the freedom to maintain an independent policy position, while at the same time exerting influence on the budget priorities of the government of the day.

A formal coalition involving NDP membership in a Liberal dominated government would be less likely, since it involve some horsetrading about Ministries, and the certainty that it would involve a Liberal Prime Minister and a Liberal Minister of Finance. This would tie the NDP's policy freedom in a way that would be inimical to their long term interests as an independent party.

The Bloc will not join a formal coalition, but will continue to serve as Kingmakers, given the stranglehold that they have on roughly 15% of the seats in the House.


_________________
--James


sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 70
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

25 Mar 2011, 5:02 pm

visagrunt wrote:
I have no objection whatsoever to a coalition.

The most likely scenario would, I think, be something like David Lewis' commitment to support the second Trudeau government for a determined period of years. This would leave the NDP with the freedom to maintain an independent policy position, while at the same time exerting influence on the budget priorities of the government of the day.

A formal coalition involving NDP membership in a Liberal dominated government would be less likely, since it involve some horsetrading about Ministries, and the certainty that it would involve a Liberal Prime Minister and a Liberal Minister of Finance. This would tie the NDP's policy freedom in a way that would be inimical to their long term interests as an independent party.

The Bloc will not join a formal coalition, but will continue to serve as Kingmakers, given the stranglehold that they have on roughly 15% of the seats in the House.


Formal Agreement Minority government topic

The idea of coalitions strikes me as bullying, the way the NDP-LIB and BLOC wanted it a few years back.

I believe a formal agreement is the way to go, in order to keep parliament honest, and to ensure NDP ideas for legislation are kept on the front burners.

What I worry about is Mr. Ignatieff in a leadership role. I do not trust him, and I would prefer to see Bob Rae as Liberal leader.


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

25 Mar 2011, 5:31 pm

sartresue wrote:
Formal Agreement Minority government topic

The idea of coalitions strikes me as bullying, the way the NDP-LIB and BLOC wanted it a few years back.

I believe a formal agreement is the way to go, in order to keep parliament honest, and to ensure NDP ideas for legislation are kept on the front burners.

What I worry about is Mr. Ignatieff in a leadership role. I do not trust him, and I would prefer to see Bob Rae as Liberal leader.


Or the way that the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc wanted it during Martin's administration?

I don't see it as bullying. I see it as putting the responsibility for determining who will have the right to govern in the hands of the House of Commons. Those coalitions, after all, are composed of men and women who were elected by their constituencies.

So, at the end of the day, who do you trust more, Mr. Ignatieff or Mr. Harper? There's no use complaining that the wrong man is leading the Liberal party--the only question, from my perspective, is which of these two men should be Prime Minister? There is no other credible option.

Now, perhaps you want Harper back in, so that Ignatieff can be disposed of and Bob crowned. That's certainly a reasoned approach. But I, for one, prefer the propsect of a Liberal, or a Liberal/NDP cabinet to Conservative one.


_________________
--James


AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

25 Mar 2011, 6:09 pm

I definitely don't see a coalition as bullying. I think it makes a lot of sense myself. I think most of the NDP would rather see the Liberals in power than the Conservatives. A coalition government would tend to be Liberal dominated which is not ideal for the NDP, but it should quell the fears of the more centrist Liberals. In all probability the NDP and Liberals will together hold a majority, or at least a larger minority than the Conservatives. That to me shows that more Canadians would approve of a center-left government than of the Conservatives and does away with that irritating problem of the splitting of the left-wing vote (which allows the Conservatives to sneak up the middle).

I have no strong feelings either was with Ignatief. From what I understand he's a smart guy, which sounds good to me. And I'm too much of an intellectual myself to be scared off by that. Although Bob Rae would make a good leader of a coalition government, where he is a former NDP member himself.

Also, wasn't the Block planning on taking part in the coalition the last time around? Correct me if I'm wrong.



sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 70
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,313
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

25 Mar 2011, 6:13 pm

visagrunt wrote:
sartresue wrote:
Formal Agreement Minority government topic

The idea of coalitions strikes me as bullying, the way the NDP-LIB and BLOC wanted it a few years back.

I believe a formal agreement is the way to go, in order to keep parliament honest, and to ensure NDP ideas for legislation are kept on the front burners.

What I worry about is Mr. Ignatieff in a leadership role. I do not trust him, and I would prefer to see Bob Rae as Liberal leader.


Or the way that the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc wanted it during Martin's administration?

I don't see it as bullying. I see it as putting the responsibility for determining who will have the right to govern in the hands of the House of Commons. Those coalitions, after all, are composed of men and women who were elected by their constituencies.

So, at the end of the day, who do you trust more, Mr. Ignatieff or Mr. Harper? There's no use complaining that the wrong man is leading the Liberal party--the only question, from my perspective, is which of these two men should be Prime Minister? There is no other credible option.

Now, perhaps you want Harper back in, so that Ignatieff can be disposed of and Bob crowned. That's certainly a reasoned approach. But I, for one, prefer the propsect of a Liberal, or a Liberal/NDP cabinet to Conservative one.


Power politics topic

I would rather see the NDP as minority government, but this will not happen.

Both Harper and Ignatieff are flawed. It would seem the only way to get rid of Iggy is to reinstate Harper. This is not advisable, but to many it would be reasonable and realistic. :eew:

I suppose the choice is between Harpy and Iggy, so we are stuck between a rock and a hard place with a yawning chasm in the middle. :roll:


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

26 Mar 2011, 12:07 am

Minority government has saved Canada from some of the worst neoliberal anti-growth policies. They cannot be as nasty, mean and stingy when the government could fall at any moment. Canada owes a lot to that. The economy would be a lot smaller had majority governments ruled.



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

26 Mar 2011, 12:20 am

sartresue wrote:
Formal Agreement Minority government topic

The idea of coalitions strikes me as bullying, the way the NDP-LIB and BLOC wanted it a few years back.

I believe a formal agreement is the way to go, in order to keep parliament honest, and to ensure NDP ideas for legislation are kept on the front burners.

What I worry about is Mr. Ignatieff in a leadership role. I do not trust him, and I would prefer to see Bob Rae as Liberal leader.


Coalitions are really the only way to function stably in a multi-party, proportional represenation system - this is why I hope to see them used more often in the future. They'll pave the way for the thinking "hey, us Canucks don't have to fear many parties creating instability - there's a way to have stable REALLY multiparty systems!"

Iggy is a p**s poor leader, though, but I think pressure from the other potential coalition member could set him straight.


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

26 Mar 2011, 7:51 pm

And may I point out that lots of countries use coalition governments. It's just in Canada that we see it as such a weird thing, probably because it's only fairly recently that enough parties have come along to almost guarantee minority governments. But Britain is using a coalition right now! It allowed the Conservatives to get into power, which would not be my personal preference, but it can obviously work in a country using the British Parliamentary system. Does anyone know if any other Commonwealth members have used coalition governments before?



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

26 Mar 2011, 9:58 pm

The British coalition is a catastrophe. People were hoping for a minority government that would not carry out experimentation but instead they are now guinea pigs in a demented lab of doom.



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

27 Mar 2011, 1:23 am

I'm all for coalitions. It works well for the Scandinavian countries. To pervert-phrase Harper, "Canada wants in too."


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,903

27 Mar 2011, 2:30 am

Well, it looks like the Dippers are acting smart and targeting Edmonton (http://www.ndp.ca/press/layton-ready-to ... eakthrough) - or, as it's known in Alberta, "Redmonton".


_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/


Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

27 Mar 2011, 4:46 am

Master_Pedant wrote:
Well, it looks like the Dippers are acting smart and targeting Edmonton (http://www.ndp.ca/press/layton-ready-to ... eakthrough) - or, as it's known in Alberta, "Redmonton".


An NDP vote is often seen as a valid protest vote in Alberta.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

27 Mar 2011, 5:47 am

Sometimes I get the feeling that Canada is an Alternate Universe.

It is the America of Other World.

ruveyn



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

27 Mar 2011, 5:59 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sometimes I get the feeling that Canada is an Alternate Universe.

It is the America of Other World.

ruveyn


Haha! Can you explain that view point a little more?


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

27 Mar 2011, 6:12 am

Fuzzy wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sometimes I get the feeling that Canada is an Alternate Universe.

It is the America of Other World.

ruveyn


Haha! Can you explain that view point a little more?


At critical junctures in history the universe splits into alternate versions. The key term the Theory of Many Worlds. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

ruveyn



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

27 Mar 2011, 7:02 am

ruveyn wrote:
Fuzzy wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Sometimes I get the feeling that Canada is an Alternate Universe.

It is the America of Other World.

ruveyn


Haha! Can you explain that view point a little more?


At critical junctures in history the universe splits into alternate versions. The key term the Theory of Many Worlds. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

ruveyn


Yes, I know that. I mean what are you saying about Canada? It strikes you are strange somehow. Thats what I want to know.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.