Stéphane Dion is Right. 50% Plus One Isn't Enough

In response to Jack Layton and some of his Quebec MPs suggesting that 50 plus 1 should be enough to settle the separation issue, Stéphane Dion writes in the Ottawa Citizen:

There are two fundamental reasons why negotiations for secession should be contingent on a clear majority. The first is that serious and irreversible decisions that affect future generations should be made by consensus, not on the basis of a weak and uncertain majority, not on the basis of a result which might have been different if the vote had been held the day before or the day after. There is no doubt that secession is something serious and probably irreversible since it is nearly impossible to rebuild a country after it has been broken. Such an action affects future generations and has serious consequences for all of the citizens of the country being broken up.

The second reason is that, even with all the goodwill in the world, negotiating the separation of a modern state would inevitably be difficult and fraught with pitfalls. What must not happen is that, while negotiators are working on a separation agreement, the majority should change its mind and decide to oppose secession. That would be an untenable situation. That is why the process should only be undertaken if there is a sufficiently large majority that will last through the inevitable difficulties of negotiation.

Making it easier to tear apart our country is not the way to go.

And remember that when Layton was running in 2004, he promised that if elected, he would repeal the Clarity Act. Who knows what this man is thinking.

Now he and Harper are on another kick. They are going to give Quebec more seats. The whole idea behind giving Alberta more seats, was because they claimed that Quebec had too many.

I'm with NDP Charlie Angus on the issue of more seats in the House (more salaries, expenses, pensions)who called it:

"putting a little bit of paint on a leaky old boat and trying to pass it off as a new Bluenose." He argued the Commons needs sweeping democratic reform, not tinkering around the edges. In particular, he called for a system of "fair and open proportional representation so that people in Canada actually feel their votes are being counted."

Sounds like more political games.

Jack Layton's Elephant in the Room

Stephen Harper has promised not to make any major changes and not to reopen the abortion debate.

But those who got him to where he is have other plans. He may have thought that taking the Religious Right into his big blue tent, would assure his political fortune, but it comes at a price.

After trying for more than half a decade, the Conservatives finally have a majority government, and now the party's longtime backers -- including the religious right -- are hoping their concerns will get the government's attention.

... David Krayden, the executive director of Conservative Values of Canada, a Christian political group, said abortion will be brought up, whether Harper likes it or not.

If he kept them at bay because his hands were tied, they are no longer tied, so we can expect some major changes, sooner rather than later.

But where does this leave Jack Layton?

Most of his caucus is from Quebec, and Quebec has always been the most socially advanced province. With Layton as a mere bystander, they won't be pleased that he is unable to stop the onslaught.

An onslaught that not even Stephen Harper will be able to stop, given the enormous number of social Conservatives in his caucus.

I guess Jack Layton didn't think this through when he decided to throw his lot in with Harper, and perhaps Harper himself didn't think it through when he decided to throw his lot in with the Religious Right.

In their quest for power, they may both be rendered powerless.

Thank You Paul Wells For Confirming My Suspicions

I've been writing a lot lately on how Jack Layton and Stephen Harper colluded to bring down the Liberals.

Forget that Layton's complicity meant that we lost a national childcare program, an aboriginal agreement that would have gone a long way toward righting years of wrong, and any real attempt at addressing climate change.

Jack Layton has had one goal and one goal only. Improving the lot of Jack Layton.

James Laxer, an NDP insider agrees, and wrote two scathing articles on the direction that Layton was taking the party.

Fake Left, Go Right: An insider’s take on Jack Layton’s game of chance

How to rehabilitate the NDP: With its exclusive fixation on winning more seats, the NDP has sacrificed the opportunity to build a truly progressive movement. On the 75th anniversary of the CCF, James Laxer argues that to save the present, we need to remember the past

I've been angry with Layton for abandoning us, but now realize that he was never on our side in the first place.

I'm giving his new MPs a chance, judging them on their own merit. But no more free rides for the NDP leader.

Journalist Paul Wells also recently had a lightbulb moment, and dug up an article he had written in 2006. From the archive: The secret plot to destroy the Liberals

... the contours of the emerging parliamentary battlefield became clearer. It quickly became almost as interesting to watch the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois as to watch the two larger parties. Something big is afoot.

Jack Layton's first question: “Mr. Speaker, 13 years ago a Liberal government was elected on a commitment to build child care spaces across the country. Three majority governments, eight surplus budgets, and not a single child care space was built.”

Not mentioning that a national childcare plan had been hammered out with the provinces, but never saw the light of day, because Layton had joined with Harper to bring down the Liberals before it had a chance.

Besides, the opposition is there to hold the government to account, not attack their political opponents.

And Harper was well pleased with his protege: “The NDP managed to substantially increase the number of seats that [it] won in the last election. As we know, it is important to everyone, including the government, that we have an opposition party that is both national in scope and principled in its approach. We wish the member well in building that kind of opposition, as long, as, of course, he remains in opposition.”

The next day Layton was hammering away at the Liberals environmental record, not mentioning that fact that it was he who sabotaged Kyoto.

This last election campaign was the most bizarre on record, and the most fraudulent. I can't help thinking that the entire thing was engineered in advance. An NDP "surge" that came from nowhere, and based on extremely convoluted figures, with a margin of error that put them in the fiction category.

But if it was a scheme, did it turn out the way Layton was promised it would? Did he expect to become leader of the Opposition in a minority, where he would have had teeth. But if he was also swindled, I feel little sympathy.

The Liberals did not collapse, they were assassinated. But it looks like the accomplice, may be the only one paying for the crime.

Vote Splitting Means American Style Justice System

It is no longer useful to remind people why they shouldn't vote for Harper. I think they already know.

The only message I can give now is to not split the vote, because that is the only thing that will give Harper a victory and possibly even a majority.

Layton's only ambition now appears to be more seats, a replay of his election strategies past. According to James Laxer in 2006:

Strangely, in the 2004 election, and much more overtly in 2006, the ndp leader exhibited a penchant for short-term fixes over long-term party-building. He became a servant to the proposition that what was good for working people and for the left was more seats for the ndp—no more, no less. Playing right into Conservative hands, in the 2006 election Layton helped frame the central issue as Liberal scandals. The Canadian Election Study, published just after the election, suggests this issue was responsible for the Conservative victory.

One of his Quebec candidates is still in school and according to his Facebook page, he likes to play videos and collect comic books. He may need a note from his mom to go to Ottawa. How is this good for the country?

To cap it off, in what was billed as his last statement as an MP, Ed Broadbent declared that power “should be taken away” from the Liberals, that the party “no longer [had] the moral authority to deserve people’s votes.” He said not a word about what a Harper government would mean for the country.

Layton appears to be using the same strategy. This election is now about him, and the rest of us be damned, even if it means returning Stephen Harper to power.

And what is the NDP stand on issues of importance? Gun control advocates are warning not to vote NDP if we want to save the gun registry. In a recent interview Layton was quite evasive on the topic, knowing that many of his MPs want to scrap it.

But what about law and order?

According to Laxer, who is an NDP insider:

On crime, Layton cravenly tried to capitalize on urban anxiety, attempting to compete with the law-and-order Conservatives by proposing four-year minimum sentences for certain gun-related offences. Urban advocacy is one thing, but US-based evidence suggests that such punitive policies simply don’t work. Regardless, Harper can now conscript the ndp’s positions in support of his own proposed legislative solutions. On these fronts—government ethics and crime—the party of progressive principle has become an accessory to the Conservative agenda.

So how can Layton possibly challenge Harper's law and order agenda, when he shares the same views, even when he knows they're wrong?

All I can say people is THINK! And please, please, please, DON'T SPLIT THE VOTE!!!!

This election is now about battling egos and we could all end up being collateral damage.

NDP Were Never Serious About Forming Government

Up to now Jack Layton has been given a free ride because no one really took him seriously as a true contender.

Then the so-called "surge" and he's running around telling us he's the best choice for prime minister. If he was serious about wanting to be our prime minister he would have taken a bit of effort to find candidates who could actually do their job.

The NDP's sudden burst of momentum is shining new light on the party's candidates and some of those standard-bearers are being found far from the ridings they are seeking to represent. NDP Leader Jack Layton has been forced to address both his recent surge in public opinion polls but also why some of his candidates are not being seen in their ridings.

Isabelle Maguire, the NDP candidate in Richmond-Arthabaska, has left for a three-week trip to France, according to La Nouvelle Union, a Victoriaville, Que., newspaper

One candidate currently in Las Vegas but running in Quebec, can't speak French. Do they really believe people from Quebec are going to vote for candidates they can't find or can't speak to?

And the media is also now critiquing the NDP platform which includes 70 billion in new spending.

The economy is still important, since it determines whether or not we can continue to pay for things like healthcare. The NDP has no track record and their platform is a fairy tale.

Only the Liberals can offer a viable alternative to Harper.

Listen to Jean Chretien and you'll be reminded of why.

NDP Wins Bid to Keep Auditor Generals G-8 Report Quiet

Canadians could have seen the Auditor Generals's G-8 spending report but the NDP decided it was best buried until after the election.

Avaaz sued, believing that Canadians had a right to know before the election, but unfortunately lost the bid.

Harper sent Layton roses today.

Enough said.

A Bit of History for the Trivia Buffs

When I read that the Globe and Mail was now endorsing a Harper majority, it reminded me of something.

Not a conspiracy theory, just a bit of trivia.

In 1998, Thomson Newspapers (Globe and Mail) launched a challenge to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The landmark decision 'struck down a law that prohibited the publication, broadcast or dissemination of opinion surveys within the last three days of a federal election campaign.

I remember a time when election laws were more stringent. All political signs had to be removed the day before and bars had to be kept shut down until after the polls closed.

And in 2004, when Stephen Harper sued the Canadian people in the Harper vs Canada challenge to the Charter, he cited the 1998 Thomson Publishing decision.

A the time he was seeking a ruling that would allow corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money during an election campaign.

There are many who believe now that if given a majority, Harper will simply go over the head of the Supreme Court and Canadian citizens will no longer have a voice.

So should we be surprised that the Globe is endorsing a Harper majority? The ultimate plan to create a zero corporate tax rate in Canada, and the multi gazillionaire Thomson family, will benefit enormously.

And so starts the countdown to "D" Day.

The NDP's Constitution May Be Missing But not Their Agenda

The media has just made it so easy now for Harper to sail to a majority. It'll be like taking candy from a baby.

The CBC is wondering where the NDP's constitution is:

Now that the NDP is within shouting distance - maybe- of forming government, a lot of people might want to take a closer look at the party, at its founding goals and principles. Questions to the NDP's media hotline yield the response that the NDP constitution is "an internal document", available to members only, and that the NDP is running on its platform, not on its constitution. And yet, anyone who wants to join the NDP has to first agree to abide by its constitution, presumably without getting a chance to read it.

The NDP's constitution is hard to ferret out, but there are copies to be found on the internet, dating from 2001 and 2003, and of course there's no way of telling if the ideas expressed in them still represent the NDP's thinking. But, crucially, there are fundamental and seminal ideals expressed, and they are potentially explosive. The principles of "democratic socialism" are laid out, and they might prove troublesome for the party as it heads towards what may be the official Opposition or even more.

And of course the gloating Conservatives who won't post a comment, but email me regularly are absolutely delirious.

I got this wonderful attack from Sun Media:



And another reader couldn't wait to send me a link to this. It will fry the NDP and Harper's smug face will be with us for decades. And with him goes our democracy.

These are the "Socialist Caucus Resolutions for the Federal NDP Convention in 2011"

The first two are fine with me but then they get dicey: 3. Nationalize U.S. Steel. 4. Close the Alberta Tar Sands

Save the jobs of the steel industry but throw oil workers out of a job?

7. Legalize Cannabis is good. 8. Canada out of NATO, NATO out of Afghanistan. Fine with me but I can hear the Cons now. In fact, the National Citizens coalition ran a complete campaign when Broadbent suggested that we get out of NATO.

Skip to 10. Justice for Palestinians, Boycott apartheid Israel. I agree but they gave Libby Davies a dressing down for suggesting the same thing.

Here comes the whoppers: 11. Nationalize the Auto Industry 12. Nationalize the Big Banks and Insurance companies 13. Nationalize Big Oil and Gas

And: 14. No NDP coalition with Business Class Political Parties. And yet Layton was ready to form a coalition with Harper.

It was a Harper supporter who sent me this so I imagine they are drafting attacks around it already.

Sometimes idealism can be just as damaging as ideology. Much of this won't play out well with moderates.

Normally, I would have dismissed this, but with Harper now poised for a majority, I have to do what I have to do. There has never been a more challenging time in this nation's history.

I've spent two years exposing Harper and neoconservatism and I feel like it's been for nothing. He's going to win.

Time For a Reality Check. Do You Really Think These Guys Can Beat out the Bloc?

I don't think anyone, at least not any Canadian, has taken the personal assaults that Michael Ignatieff has, and is still standing. Two years, non-stop.

And today he went after the people who really need to be taken to task. The media and the pollsters.

Ignatieff criticized the national media for starting to write him out of the race after a week of polls — from Angus Reid, EKOS, Nanos and Ipsos Reid —have all shown the NDP vaulting into second place. He insisted he's still very much in the race.

They are suggesting that the NDP are going to get 108 seats, but that's only if they can reduce the Bloc to 3.

I emailed them all individually, asking them what seats they felt the NDP could take from the Bloc. I've yet to hear from any of them.

One of the NDP candidates is in Las Vegas.

Until last week, she'd been working in Ottawa – about three hours away from the riding – as an assistant manager of Oliver's Pub, on the Carleton University campus.

Why let an election get in the way of a trip to Vegas?

And it doesn't get much better:

The vast majority of the party’s Quebec candidates don’t list any contact information with their profiles on the NDP sites. The slate of Quebec candidates includes union leaders, teachers and a Cree leader, Romeo Saganash. Others are still in school.

Two candidates running for office are Charmaine Borg in Terrebonne-Blainville and Matthew Dubé in Chambly-Borduas. The two are co-presidents of the McGill NDP club. Mr. Dubé’s posts on Twitter are largely devoted to hockey, comic books and computer games, with the occasional forward of tweets by NDP Leader Jack Layton.

Another, Sana Hassainia, who is running for the NDP in Verchères-Les Patriotes, makes no mention on her Twitter page of her NDP connections, except when asked by others to confirm that she is in fact the NDP candidate.

Do they honestly believe that the Bloc will be beat out by these people? Of course they don't.

But what would it mean if they did? The Bloc has some very high quality MPs. They would be replaced by people who don't even appear to be very politically engaged.

The $150,000 a year might help the comic book collector add to his holdings, but seriously? This is someone you want making decisions for you? It would be the Reform Party c1993. Most of the MPs were ignorant bigots, but at least they were ignorant bigots who cared, sort of.

I just listened to Layton's new ad and it was all "I", "I", "I". He believes the hype even if common sense tells him otherwise.

The sad thing is that any NDP gains, if in fact they're real, would be at the expense of other progressives. How is that going to restore our democracy?

All the more reason to rise up.

And so it Starts. Business Community Give Harper the Fuel he Needs for Majority

First off, I should say that if the NDP had a real chance of taking a significant number of seats from the Conservatives, and we could get our democracy back, I would be campaigning for them. But I fear it's 1988 all over again and we will be stuck with Harper until the bastard drops the bucket.

And he'll live to 150 just to spite us.

Now economists are sending out veiled warnings of a socialist agenda.

Silly them. Layton hasn't been a socialist, or even left wing for years.

I am now more frightened of Stephen Harper than I've ever been, becasue the corporate sector knows that Stephen Harper is their best friend. They will do what it takes to keep Layton in check, now or later.