“We have a new coalition now on Parliament Hill: It's a coalition between Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff,” said the NDP leader, who dismissed the Liberal amendment as “a fig leaf.”
“Today we have learned that you can't trust Mr. Ignatieff to oppose Mr. Harper. If you oppose Mr. Harper and you want a new government, I urge you to support the NDP.”
And this is why I don't vote NDP anymore. Seriously. Just stop talking, Jack.
Duceppe at least had a coherent - and far more entertaining - criticism of the proposed Liberal amendment:
Today, Mr. Duceppe ridiculed the Liberal proposition, saying the timeline ensures the Conservatives will remain in power until at least the next budget. Mr. Duceppe predicted Mr. Ignatieff will respond to a report in June by saying Canadians want an election during summer like “a hole in the head,” mocking a recent line from the Liberal leader. Mr. Duceppe predicted the Liberals will use the same line again in December to argue there's no appetite for an election over Christmas.
And I agree.
Instead, the Liberals should be insisting on the amendments I suggested yesterday (removing the E.I. wait time and removing the requirement for matching provincial and municipal funds for infrastructure spending). And in fact, a lot of people thought that they were preparing to do just that.
So why didn't they? It's just a guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if Ignatieff proposed just such a thing to Layton last night and was told in no uncertain terms that the NDP would not support anything short of a defeat of the government. Without their support, and given that the Conservatives would resist strongly even minor changes to the wording of their budget, such amendments could never pass. So we are left with a lukewarm and toothless amendment that gives the appearance of accountability but really changes nothing.
Thanks, Jack.
I knew it wouldn't take long for Liberals to blame Layton for Iggy's retreat. Brava.
ReplyDeleteGotta agree with Greg. It was Ignatieff who decided to play the Stephane Dion game all over again. There's no evidence at all that Layton had anything to do with his decision.
ReplyDeleteChet - Wait for it.
ReplyDeleteGreg - The Liberals aren't blaming anybody. I am merely indulging in some personal speculation. And BTW, does this mean that if Ignatieff had proposed such amendments that the NDP would have voted in favour, or at least let them pass?
All I know that Layton’s condemnation of Igniff’s position has undermined the opportunity to keep Harpers feet to the fire AND any future vote of non confidence on his failure to follow through with his budget promises. I think Layton just shot us all in the foot, would I have preferred a coalition, yes, would they be able to turn this crisis around, no, should we now give Harper enough rope to ensure that he is truly dead, yes!
ReplyDeleteWell I guess that "progressive' liberals who choose to stay in the LPC need to blame someone other then themselves.
ReplyDeleteIggy is getting away with this pathetic retreat from any attempt at real leadership because prog liberals have no real clout in the party.
Fine - we get that you don't like Layton. The NDP is a grassroots party and the caucus is a real team so we are not defined by only one man. That said,most of the swipes I see taken at Layton are without foundation. Like this one.
I like Jack-Jack when he stays quiet.
ReplyDeleteDuceppe is right. Wish he'd change his stripes.
As for the Libs? Who's leader now?
As for Cons? When the heck did they change their party colours? Who's running this banana boat?
"So why didn't they? It's just a guess, but I wouldn't be surprised if Ignatieff proposed just such a thing to Layton last night and was told in no uncertain terms that the NDP would not support anything short of a defeat of the government. Without their support, and given that the Conservatives would resist strongly even minor changes to the wording of their budget, such amendments could never pass. So we are left with a lukewarm and toothless amendment that gives the appearance of accountability but really changes nothing.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Jack."
Ah criticism based on baseless, evidence free speculation. Got to love it. 'Iggy really did want to do the right thing but Jack wouldn't let him... in the little scene I just made up in my head.' - what a bastard that makes Jack.
I guess that's more palatable to believe than the far more likely probability that Iggy likes this budget just fine, feels far more affinity to Stephen Harper's free market uber alles ideology than any purely cosmetic progressiveness and has said yes to a coalition - just not with the party we were all hoping for.
I absolutely agree with removing the wait time for E.I. It has never made sense to me whatsoever.
ReplyDeleteInspiring desperation and a willingness to settle for what's on offer?
ReplyDelete